IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 232 CWP-13840-2023 (O&M) Date of decision: 23.07.2026 VINAY KUMAR ... Petitioner Versus STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS ... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMAN CHAUDHARY Present : Mr. Suresh Kumar Redhu, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Naveen Kumar, Addl. AG, Haryana. **** AMAN CHAUDHARY, J. (Oral) 1. Learned counsel submits that a detailed representation, Annexure P4, has been submitted by the petitioner with regard to adverse remarks in the ACR and now he has been discharged vide judgment dated 02.08.2025, thus, prays that the said remarks need to be reconsidered, as the basis thereof is no longer exists, in light of Sunil Dutt vs. The State of Haryana, 2012(27) SCT 288 and Bhim Singh vs. State of Hayana and others, CWP-5520-2020, decided on 06.05.2022, Annexure P6, in a time bound manner. 2. The aforesaid facts having been brought out, during the course of hearing, learned State counsel, on instructions, states that the matter will be reconsidered and decided, within a period of 6 months, in accordance with law, taking note of the aforesaid submissions and judgments, uninfluenced by the letters impugned herein, which this Court has no reason to believe the authorities would not address in a just, fair and reasonable manner. 3. The matter stands disposed of accordingly and if the petitioner is found entitled, grant the benefit forthwith. Needless to say, if the orders are adverse to his interest, the same may be passed after granting opportunity of hearing to him and shall contain reasons, whereupon he shall be free to seek legal redress thereupon. (AMAN CHAUDHARY) 23.07.2026 JUDGE ashok Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No ASHOK KUMAR 2026.07.23 16:47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document