Bhupender Singh And Ors vs State Of Haryana And Others
2024 Latest Caselaw 16342 P&H

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Bhupender Singh And Ors vs State Of Haryana And Others on 5 September, 2024

                                   Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:116148

CWP-22218
    22218-2024 (O&M).                                        -1-




           IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT
                          CHANDIGARH


125

                                           CWP--22218-2024 (O&M).
                                           Date of Decision: 05.09.2024.


BHUPENDER SINGH AND OTHERS
                                                                     .. Petitioners


                   Versus

STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS

                                                                   ... Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD S. BHARDWAJ.

Present:     Mr. K.D.S. Hooda, Advocate,
             M
             for the petitioners.
                     petitioner

             Ms. Shruti Jain, Sr. DAG, Haryana
             M
             for respondents
                 respondent No.1 and 2.

             Mr. Vivek Saini, Advocate,
             for respondent No.3 to 5.

VINOD S. BHARDWAJ, J. (ORAL)

Challenge in the present writ petition is to the selection list on

the ground that the petitioners were higher in the order of merit than the

private respondents, yet, they were not offered appointment and instead

private respondents have been retained in service.

2 Learned State counsel submits that the impugned selection list

has already been quashed by a Division Bench of this High Court vide

1 of 2

Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:116148

CWP-22218 22218-2024 (O&M). -2-

judgment dated 31.05.2024 passed in CWP No.1563 of 2024 titled as

'Sukriti Malik Vs. State of Haryana and others others' along with connected writ

petitions and LPAs and that the said judgment has also been upheld by the

Hon'ble Supreme Court. She contends that the private respondents are

continuing as an interim stop gap arrangement in terms of indulgence

granted by the Court since a review has already been preferred by the

selected candidates.

candidates

3 In view of above, the present writ petition seeking quashing of

the selection list, list which has already been quashed quashed, would not be

maintainable at this stage.

4 Faced with above, learned counsel counsel for the petitioners does not

press the instant petition at this stage.

5 Disposed of as not pressed at this stage with liberty to the

petitioners to file a fresh petition on the same cause of action in the event of

respondents succeeding in the review review application and/or in any

consequential proceedings arising therefrom..

September 05,
          0 2024.                            (VINOD
                                              VINOD S. BHARDWAJ)
raj arora                                           JUDGE

              Whether speaking/reasoned          : Yes/No
              Whether reportable                 : Yes/No




                                    2 of 2