IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH 689 (2 cases) CWP-19852-2009 (O&M) And CWP-6469-2009 (O&M) Date of Decision: 17.07.2026 RAMESH MALIK ... Petitioner VERSUS STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS ... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMAN CHAUDHARY. **** Present: Proxy Counsel for Ms. Savita Bhandari, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Naveen Kumar, Addl. A.G., Haryana. **** AMAN CHAUDHARY, J. (ORAL) 1. Prayer made in the present petition is for issuance of a writ in the nature of quo warranto and for quashing the order dated 14.12.2009, Annexure P-1, vide which the services of the petitioner were terminated might not be surviving due to efflux of time especially in wake of there being no interim order. 2. Learned State Counsel refers to the written statement to contend that the petitioner was treated as a Class-III employee, accordingly his pay was fixed as such and was thus required to be retired at the age of 58 years. 3. Disposed of accordingly, however, reserving the petitioner with a liberty to get it revived by demonstrating that the cause still subsists. (AMAN CHAUDHARY) JULY 17, 2026. JUDGE Rajender Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No RAJENDER KUMAR 2026.07.20 18:47 I am the author of this document