CWP-19592-2004 -1 - IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 425-1 CWP-19592-2004 (O&M) RAVI KANT AND ANOTHER …..Petitioners VERSUS HARYANA VIDYUD PRASRAN NIGAM LIMITED AND OTHERS .....Respondents AND 425-2 CWP-16398-2011 (O&M) Date of Decision: 08.07.2026 SATYAVAN AND OTHERS …..Petitioners VERSUS HARYANA VIDYUD PRASRAN NIGAM LIMITED AND OTHERS .....Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE AMAN CHAUDHARY Present:- None for the petitioner(s). Mr. Anil Chawla, Advocate for respondents No. 1, 3 & 4. **** AMAN CHAUDHARY, J. (ORAL) 1. The prayer made in the present petition for directing the respondent Nos. 1 to 4 not to apply the amended rule of essential qualifications might not be surviving due to efflux of time and also the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of Himachal Pradesh and others vs. Raj Kumar and others, Civil Appeal No.9746 of 2011, decided on 20.05.2022, wherein it was observed that the broad proposition RAJENDER KUMAR 2026.07.10 16:26 I am the author of this document CWP-19592-2004 -2 - formulated in Y.V. Rangaiah vs. J. Sreenivasa Rao (1983) 3 SCC 284 does not reflect the correct constitutional position. 2. Disposed of accordingly, however, reserving the petitioner with a liberty to submit representation to respondents, if there is any other grievance. 3. Photocopy of this order be placed on the file of another connected case. (AMAN CHAUDHARY) JUDGE 08.07.2026 Rajender Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether Reportable: Yes/No RAJENDER KUMAR 2026.07.10 16:26 I am the author of this document