[Cites 2, Cited by 0]
Punjab-Haryana High Court
State Of Haryana And Others vs Abhishek Verma And Anr on 27 January, 2026
RA-LP-109-2025
2025 ( O&M ), RA-LP-127-2025
RA 2025 ( O&M ) and RA
RA-LP-128-2025 ( O&M ) -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
RA-LP-109
109-2025 ( O&M ) and RA-LP-128
128-2025 ( O&M ) in LPA-691-2022
2022
State of Haryana and others .......Applicants/Appellants
Versus
Abhishek Verma .......Respondent
RA-LP-127
127-2025 ( O&M ) in LPA-692-2022
2022
State of Haryana and others .......Applicants/Appellants
Versus
Ankur Mittal .......Respondent
Date of decision : 27.01.2026
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHEEL NAGU, CHIEF JUSTICE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV BERRY
Present: Mr. Amandeep Singh Talwar, Advocate, for the review applicants
in RA-LP-109-2025 in LPA-691
691-2022.
Mr. Neeraj Gupta, Addl. Advocate General, Haryana,
for the review applicants/appellants
in RA-LP-127-2025 in LPA-692 692-2022 and
in RA-LP-128-2025 in LPA-691 691-2022.
Mr. Arjun Pratap Atma Ram, Advocate (arguing counsel), and
Mr. Brijesh Khosla, Advocate, for non
non-applicant/respondent
applicant/respondent No.1
in RA-LP-109-2025 and RA-LPLP-128-2025 in LPA-691-2022.
Ms. Vibhuti Naraina, Advocate,
for non-applicant/respondent
applicant/respondent No.1
in RA-LP-127-LP-2025
2025 in LPA
LPA-692-2022.
****
SHEEL NAGU, CHIEF JUSTICE ( Oral )
1. This common order shall dispose of three review applications.
RA-LP-109
109-2025 in LPA-691-2022 has been filed by eleven (11) applicants
claiming themselves to be members of Haryana Civil Service (Executive
Branch) Officers Association, whereas RA
RA-LP-127-2025 in LPA-692-2022
and RA-LP
LP-128-2025 in LPA-691-2022
2022 have been filed by State of Haryana.
1 of 5
RA-LP-109-2025
2025 ( O&M ), RA-LP-127-2025
RA 2025 ( O&M ) and RA
RA-LP-128-2025 ( O&M ) -2-
2. The applicants in all these three applications are seeking review
of common order dated 17.07.2025 passed in LPAs
LPAs-691-2022 and 692-2022,
2022,
both preferred by the State of Haryana against common order dated
18.04.2022 passed in CWPs No. 6584 of 2019 and 7651 oof 2021.
2.1 Vide the order under review, after adjudicating the dispute in
question, by relying upon two decisions of Apex Court in K. Manjusree v.
State of Andhra Pradesh and another, (2008) 3 SCC 512 and Tej Prakash
Pathak and others v. Rajasthan High Court
Court and others, 2025 (2) SCC 1, this
Court dismissed both the LPAs in the following terms :
"5. In view of above discussion, this Court sees no
reason to take a different view than the one taken by the
learned Single Judge.
6. Before parting, it would be appropriate to note
that despite the petitioners' case being based on sound and
time tested principles of Service Jurisprudence, the action
time-tested
of the functionaries of the State of Haryana appears to be
not bona fide. This litigation ought not to have arisen in the
very first place had the State of Haryana and its
functionaries obtained proper legal advice. The action of
the appellants herein appears to be merely to scuttle the
genuine claim of the petitioners. Thus the appellant
appellant-State of
Haryana is liable to be saddled with cost of Rs. 50,000/
50,000/- out
of which Rs. 10,000/-
10,000/ each shall be paid to both the
petitioners, namely, Abhishek Verma and Ankur Mittal and
the remaining amount of Rs. 30,000/
30,000/- shall be credited in
the account of Punjab & Haryana Bar Association
Association,
Chandigarh for having wasted precious time of this Court in
pursuing this avoidable piece of litigation.
7. With the above observations, both the appeals
stand dismissed with costs."
2 of 5
RA-LP-109-2025
2025 ( O&M ), RA-LP-127-2025
RA 2025 ( O&M ) and RA
RA-LP-128-2025 ( O&M ) -3-
3. Review applicants in RA--109-LP-2025,
2025, who are claiming
themselves to be members of HCS (Executive Branch) Officers Association,
who were not parties either in the writ petitions (CWPs No. 6584 of 2019 and
7651 of 2021) or before this Court in LPAs No. 691 and 692 of 2022, are
before this Court seeking their impleadment aass interveners in LPA No. 691 of
2022, by way of CM-7588-LPA-2025;
CM 2025; and also review of order dated
17.07.2025 of this Court, by alleging that there is a palpable error in the order
under review on the strength of judgment dated 23.08.2022, whereby Co-
Co
ordinatee Bench of this Court, which was dealing with the issue of vires of
Rules 4, 6, 8, 11 and Schedule 1 of the Haryana Outstanding Sports Persons
(Recruitment and Conditions of Service Rules, 2018), on the basis of
statement made by learned counsel for the St
State
ate of Haryana that no
appointment to HCS and HPS had been made under the Rules of 2018,
disposed of CWPs No. 24683 of 2018 and 2941 of 2019 as having rendered
infructuous.
4. Pertinently, in aforesaid two writ petitions, i.e. CWPs No. 24683
of 2018 and 2941 of 2019, an interlocutory order was passed on 20.02.2019,
which was to the following extent :-
:
"We
We have heard learned counsel for the rival
parties qua the grievance raised in the present petition. We
did see that by virtue of notification dated 5.9
5.9.2018, there is
a reservation from the Haryana Outstanding Sports Persons
to be directly recruited to Group I posts irrespective of the
educational qualification or academic qualification
required for the post. Prima facie, we are of the opinion that
there should be no difficulty if such outstanding sports
persons are accommodated in the lower posts like Class III
or Class II posts. But keeping in mind the nature of the
3 of 5
RA-LP-109-2025
2025 ( O&M ), RA-LP-127-2025
RA 2025 ( O&M ) and RA
RA-LP-128-2025 ( O&M ) -4-
skill/education required for the job to be performed by
Class I or Group A employees and keeping in view the
intelligentia required for the Group A post, we do not think
that the outstanding sports persons should be directly
recruited to Group A or Class I posts without the required
educational qualification/skill/experience as required and
also without qualifying examination etc. That would affect
also
the administration. We may add that if government wants to
grant incentives to them, the same can be granted in a
different form.
We, therefore, grant a chance to the State
Government to rethink and
and revisit the rules in question for
streamlining the issue.
Adjourned to 7.3.2019.
Photocopy of the order be placed in the connected
file."
5. It is pertinent to point out that grounds No. (vi) and ((vii) with
regard to order passed in CWPs No. 24683 of 2018 and 2941 of 2019 had been
raised by the State of Haryana in LPA-691
LPA 691-2022, but since the same were not
dealt with in the order under review, therefore, tthese
hese are deemed to be rejected
by the order under review.
6. From the aforesaid, it is obvious that there was no writ, order or
direction issued restraining any appointment to be made under the Rules of
2018, which were statutory in nature.
7. Learned counsel for the State of Haryana does not dispute that the
Rules of 2018 were primarily repealed on 26.02.2021.
8. This Court, while passing the order under review, was faced with
a situation to adjudicate the validity of rejection of candidature of two
candidates, namely Ankur Mittal and Abhishek Verma, which took place on
4 of 5
RA-LP-109-2025
2025 ( O&M ), RA-LP-127-2025
RA 2025 ( O&M ) and RA
RA-LP-128-2025 ( O&M ) -5-
29.11.2018 and on 06.01.2020,
06.01.2020, respectively, when the 2018 Rules were still in
existence and in force.
9. Therefore, vide order under review, this Court, while following
the time-tested
tested principle of Service Jurisprudence that once the game has
begun, rules of game cannot be changed,
changed, upheld decision of the learned Single
Judge in favour of both the candidates, and dismissed both the LPAs filed by
the State of Haryana.
10. Thus, it is obvious that there is no palpable error, which may be
found in the order under review.
11. More so,, these three review applications appear to be vexatious
and, therefore, need to be dismissed with heavy costs, as these have consumed
enough time of this Court, which could been used in more pressing matters.
12. Accordingly, all these review application
applicationss stand dismissed, each
with cost of Rs. 25,000/-,
25,000/ , to be deposited by the applicant(s) in each review
application in favour of Punjab & Haryana Bar Association, Chandigarh,
within a period of fifteen days.
13. Since RA-LP-109-2025
2025 has been dismissed, ther
therefore, CM-7588
7588-
LPA-2025
2025 filed by review applicants for their impleadment also stands
dismissed.
14. All the pending applications stand disposed of.
( SHEEL NAGU )
CHIEF JUSTICE
( SANJIV BERRY )
January 27, 2026 JUDGE
narotam
Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No
Whether reportable Yes/No
5 of 5
