Punjab-Haryana High Court
Akshay And Others vs State Of Haryana And Others on 20 April, 2024
Author: Vikas Bahl
Bench: Vikas Bahl
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:053124
CWP-8745-2024 -1- 2024:PHHC:053124
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
(113)
CWP-8745-2024
Date of decision: - 20.04.2024
Akshay and others
....Petitioners
Versus
State of Haryana and others
.....Respondents
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS BAHL
Present:- Mr. Ravinder Singh Dhull, Advocate
for the petitioners.
Ms. Rajni Gupta, Additional Advocate General, Haryana.
****
VIKAS BAHL, J. (ORAL)
1. This is a civil writ petition filed under Article 226/227 of the
Constitution of India for issuance of a writ, order or direction in the
nature of certiorari for quashing the impugned notice dated 29.02.2024
(Annexure P-12) vide which the candidature of the petitioners has been
rejected. A further prayer has been made for issuance of a writ in the
nature of mandamus directing the respondent No.3 to recommend the
name of petitioners for the post of Male Constable (General Duty) as per
their own merit under unreserved category in view of the earlier
recommendation dated 21.02.2024 (Annexure P-10).
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the
case of the petitioners is covered by a judgment of Co-ordinate Bench of
this Court passed in case titled as "Om Roj Vs. Haryana Staff Selection
1 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:053124
CWP-8745-2024 -2- 2024:PHHC:053124
Commission and others, in CWP-2667-2022, decided on 28.04.2022
(Annexure P-18) and the LPA bearing LPA-1203-2022, filed against the
said judgment, has been dismissed on 31.01.2024 (Annexure P-19). It is
further submitted that for the grievances raised by the petitioners in the
present case, the petitioners would give a detailed representation to
respondent No.3-Commission and prays that they would be satisfied in
case respondent No.3-Commission considers the said representation, in
accordance with law, in a specified time frame and in case, the pleas
raised by the petitioners are found to be meritorious, then, grant the
appropriate relief.
3. Learned State counsel has submitted that respondent No.3-
Commission would consider the said representation in accordance with
law within a period of two months from the date of submission of the
same.
4. Keeping in view the above-said facts and circumstances, the
present petition is disposed of in the following terms: -
(i) It would be open to the petitioners to give a detailed
representation to respondent No.3-Commission within a
period of two weeks from today.
(ii) In case any such representation is filed by the petitioners,
respondent No.3-Commission would consider the same
within a period of two months from the date of submission of
the said representation and in case, after considering the said
representation, respondent No.3-Commission is of the view
that the pleas raised by the petitioners are meritorious, then,
the appropriate relief be granted to them as expeditiously as
possible. In case, respondent No.3-Commission is of the
view that the pleas raised by the petitioners are meritless,
2 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:053124
CWP-8745-2024 -3- 2024:PHHC:053124
then, a speaking order rejecting the claim be passed within
the aforesaid period of two months.
5. It is made clear that this Court has not opined on the merits
of the case and respondent No.3-Commission would consider and decide
the matter independently, in accordance with law.
( VIKAS BAHL )
April 20, 2024 JUDGE
naresh.k
Whether reasoned/speaking? Yes/No
Whether reportable? Yes/No
3 of 3
