[Cites 10, Cited by 0]
Punjab-Haryana High Court
Pawan Kumar vs State Of Haryana And Another on 24 April, 2026
109 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CWP-12441-2026
Date of decision: 24.04.2026
Pawan Kumar ....Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana and another ...Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARPREET SINGH BRAR
Present: Mr. Abhilaksh Grover, Advocate
for the petitioner.
Mr. Piyush Khanna, Addl.A.G., Haryana.
HARPREET SINGH BRAR, J. (ORAL)
1. The present civil writ petition has been filed under Articles
226/227 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ in the nature of
certiorari for quashing of order dated 19.03.2026 (Annexure P-7). Further, for
issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to
consider the petitioner against the vacant posts of Technical Expert advertised
by notice dated 12.01.2024 (Annexure P-1) and grant him opportunity to appear
for the interview.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner inter alia contends that
respondent No.1 advertised 55 posts for engagement of Technical Experts on
contractual basis on 12.01.2024 as discernible from Annexure P-1. The
petitioner applied for the advertised post and was allotted application
No.TECH-2021-000055 as evident from Annexure P-2. On 14.03.2024, the
petitioner came to know that 44 persons have been appointed against the 55
vacancies. The petitioner made representations on 24.02.2025 (Annexure P-4)
NEHA
2026.04.27 16:47
I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this
document
Punjab and Haryana High Court,
Chandigarh
and 28.03.2025 (Annexure P-5) which remained unheeded prompting the
petitioner to approach this Court by way of filing CWP No.32396 of 2025 titled
as Pawan Kumar Vs. State of Haryana and another which was disposed of
vide order dated 03.11.2025 (Annexure P-6) with a direction to the respondents
to consider the representation and pass a speaking order after affording an
opportunity of personal hearing.
2.2 In purported compliance, the respondents have passed the
impugned speaking order on 19.03.2026 (Annexure P-7) rejecting the
representations of the petitioner on the ground that he was not eligible. The
speaking order is illegal and arbitrary and passed without proper application of
mind. The respondents have acted in violation of the directions issued by this
Court on 03.11.2025 (Annexure P-6) which directed a speaking order. Further,
the rejection of the petitioner's candidature who was one of the short listed
candidates in the merit list, despite existing of vacancies is discriminatory and
violates the Articles 14 & 16 of the Constitution of India.
3. Per contra, learned State counsel submits that the Department of
Urban Local Bodies, Haryana, invited applications for 55 posts of Technical
Experts by issuing an advertisement dated 12.01.2024. Thereafter, a list of
shortlisted candidates was published on the official website of the Department,
informing the candidates to appear before the Selection Committee for
document verification and interview on 24.02.2024 at 10:00 A.M. in the office
of the Directorate of Urban Local Bodies, Haryana, Sector 4, Panchkula. It was
further specifically mentioned in the said notice that in case candidates failed to
appear for the interview on the scheduled date and time i.e. 24.02.2024 at 10:00
NEHA
2026.04.27 16:47
I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this
document
Punjab and Haryana High Court,
Chandigarh
A.M., no further opportunity would be granted. Admittedly, the petitioner did
not attend the document verification nor appear for the interview. Accordingly,
he was not offered appointment due to his non-appearance before the Selection
Committee. As such, the petitioner cannot, after a lapse of nearly one year, be
permitted to seek extension of time and participate in the interview. The entire
selection process has since been concluded, and the petitioner was not selected
due to his own lapse.
4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after perusing the
record of the case with their able assistance, it transpires that the petitioner
participated in the selection process for 55 advertised posts of Technical
Experts on a contractual basis in terms of the advertisement dated 12.01.2024
(Annexure P-1). The petitioner was one of the shortlisted candidates and a
public notice was issued on the official website of the respondent-Department
directing all shortlisted candidates to appear before the Selection Committee for
document verification and interview on 24.02.2024 at 10:00 A.M. in the office
of the Directorate of Urban Local Bodies, Haryana. It was further clearly
stipulated in the said notice that in the event a candidate failed to appear for the
interview on the scheduled date and time, no further opportunity would be
granted. The petitioner remained indolent and as per his own pleadings, made
representations only on 24.02.2025 and 28.03.2025, after a lapse of nearly one
year. As such, this Court finds no ground to interfere at this stage.
5. It is trite law that the delay in approaching this Court under Article
226 of the Constitution of India may be condoned if sufficient cause is
indicated or a reasonable explanation is provided for the same. However, the
NEHA
2026.04.27 16:47
I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this
document
Punjab and Haryana High Court,
Chandigarh
facts of the matter at hand indicate otherwise. Learned counsel petitioner has
failed to specify any compelling or extenuating circumstance which prevented
him/her from approaching this Court for such a long time. Reference in this
regard may be made to the judgment rendered by a three-Judge Bench of the
Hon'ble Supreme Court in Chairman/Managing Director, U.P. Power
Corporation Limited and Others vs. Ram Gopal (2021) 13 SCC 225, wherein,
the following was held:
"16. Whilst it is true that limitation does not strictly apply to
proceedings under Articles 32 or 226 of the Constitution of
India, nevertheless, such rights cannot be enforced after an
unreasonable lapse of time. Consideration of unexplained delays
and inordinate laches would always be relevant in writ actions,
and writ courts naturally ought to be reluctant in exercising their
discretionary jurisdiction to protect those who have slept over
wrongs and allowed illegalities to fester. Fence- sitters cannot be
allowed to barge into Courts and cry for their rights at their
convenience, and vigilant citizens ought not to be treated alike
with mere opportunists. On multiple occasions, it has been
restated that there are implicit limitations of time within which
writ remedies can be enforced. In SS Balu v. State of Kerala,
this Court observed thus:
"17. It is also well settled principle of law that "delay
defeats equity". .... It is now a trite law that where the writ
petitioner approaches the High Court after a long
delay, reliefs prayed for may be denied to them on the
ground of delay and laches irrespective of the fact that
they are similarly situated to the other candidates who
obtain the benefit of the judgment."" (emphasis added)
6. Further, in Mrinmoy Maity vs. Chhanda Koley and others 2024
AIR SC 2717, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has categorically observed that the
High Courts must factor in the delay, while exercising its discretionary powers
under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. It was further opined that undue
and unexplained delay may be reason enough to dismiss a petition as indolent
litigants ought not to be encouraged by writ Courts.
NEHA
2026.04.27 16:47
I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this
document
Punjab and Haryana High Court,
Chandigarh
7. In State of Uttaranchal v. Shiv Charan Singh Bhandari, (2013)
12 SCC 179, while considering the issue regarding delay and laches and
referring to earlier judgments on the issue, a Two-Judge Bench of the Hon'ble
Supreme Court opined that repeated representations made will not keep the
issues alive. A stale or a dead issue/dispute cannot be got revived even if such a
representation has either been decided by the authority or got decided by
getting a direction from the court as the issue regarding delay and laches is to
be decided with reference to original cause of action and not with reference to
any such order passed. Delay and laches on the part of a government servant
may deprive him of the benefit which had been given to others. Article 14 of
the Constitution of India, in a situation of that nature, will not be attracted as it
is well settled that law leans in favour of those who are alert and vigilant.
8. In Union of India and others v. M. K. Sarkar, (2010) 2 SCC 59,
the Hon'ble Supreme Court has ruled that when a belated representation in
regard to a 'stale' or 'dead' issue/dispute is considered and decided, in
compliance with a direction by the court/tribunal to do so, the date of such
decision cannot be considered as furnishing a fresh cause of action for reviving
the 'dead' issue or time-barred dispute. The issue of limitation or delay and
laches should be considered with reference to the original cause of action and
not with reference to the date on which an order is passed in compliance with a
Court's direction. Neither a court's direction to consider a representation issued
without examining the merits, nor a decision given in compliance with such
direction, will extend the limitation, or erase the delay and laches.
NEHA
2026.04.27 16:47
I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this
document
Punjab and Haryana High Court,
Chandigarh
9. In the present case, the Petitioner has approached this Court after a
considerable lapse of time. Repeated representations will not keep the issues
alive and no plausible explanation has been offered by learned counsel for the
petitioner for the delay in filing the present petition.
10. In view of the discussion above, this Court does not find it
appropriate to invoke its extraordinary writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India. Accordingly, the present petition stands dismissed.
(HARPREET SINGH BRAR)
JUDGE
24.04.2026
Neha
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No
Whether reportable : Yes/No
NEHA
2026.04.27 16:47
I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this
document
Punjab and Haryana High Court,
Chandigarh
