IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 235 CWP-5580-2023 (O&M) Date of decision: 28.07.2026 EASI BALRAJ ... Petitioner Versus STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS ... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMAN CHAUDHARY Present : Mr. Rajinder Singh Malik, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Naveen Kumar, Addl. AG, Haryana. **** AMAN CHAUDHARY, J. (Oral) 1. Learned counsel submits that in the departmental proceedings, the Director General of Police, vide order dated 02.12.2016 had only issued him warning observing that statement of SHO was biased based on conjectures and surmises and not on substantial material facts, thus, adverse entry of integrity doubtful for 2015-16, needs to be reconsidered, which was the sole basis of he having been prematurely retired vide order dated 30.11.2022. In this regard, a representation, Annexure P10, has been submitted to the Director General of Police which has not yet evoked any response and he, on instructions, prays that a direction may be given to the respondents to decide the same in a time bound manner. 2. Learned State counsel has no objection to the limited prayer made. 3. In view of the above and without commenting upon the merits of the case, this petition is hereby disposed of with a direction to the respondents to consider and decide the representation, Annexure P10, after granting opportunity of hearing to him, expeditiously, in accordance with law, taking note of submissions made hereinabove, which this Court has no reason to believe the authorities would not address in a just, fair and reasonable manner. 4. Upon doing so, if found entitled, grant the benefit forthwith. Needless to say, if the orders are adverse to his interest, the same shall contain reasons and the petitioner shall be free to seek legal redress thereupon. 28.07.2026 (AMAN CHAUDHARY) ashok JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No ASHOK KUMAR 2026.07.28 17:38 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document