Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Punjab and Haryana · body

2024 DAILYLAW 2770 (PNJ)

ANOOP KUMAR AND ANR v. STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS

CWP/14367/2026 · 2026-07-03

Nidhi Gupta

body2024

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

CWP-14367 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 227 Anoop Kumar and another State of Haryana and others CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA Present: - NIDHI GUPTA, J. (ORAL) 1. under Article nature of Certiorari 15.07.2024 2. has pointed that vide order dated CWP-5560 and others’, the Hon’ble Single Judge, ha 14367-2026 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP Date of Decision: Kumar and another Versus State of Haryana and others CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA Mr. Ankur Sidhar, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Teevar Sharma, DAG, Haryana. NIDHI GUPTA, J. (ORAL) The present writ petition has been filed Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Certiorari for quashing the impugned Speaking Order dated 15.07.2024 (Annexure P-8). At the very outset, learned counsel for the respondent has pointed that vide order dated 11.03.2024 ( 5560-2024 titled as ‘Anoop Kumar and others ’, the Hon’ble Single Judge, had “1 to 4 xxx 5. Mr. Harish Nain, AAG, Haryana, who is present in Court, accepts notice for the respondents. Learned State counsel submits that in case representations dated 07.02.2024 & 13.02.2024 (Annexure P-7) is still pending consideration before the authority concerned, the said representation will be decided within a period of 4 weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order by passing an appropriate speaking order.” IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-14367-2026 Date of Decision: 03.07.2026 .… Petitioners .... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA Mr. Ankur Sidhar, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Teevar Sharma, DAG, Haryana. writ petition has been filed by the petitioner 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ in the for quashing the impugned Speaking Order dated learned counsel for the respondent-State 11.03.2024 (Annexure P-7) passed in Anoop Kumar and others vs. State of Haryana directed as follows:- xxx xxx 5. Mr. Harish Nain, AAG, Haryana, who is present in Court, accepts notice for the respondents. Learned State counsel submits that in case representations dated 07.02.2024 & 7) is still pending consideration authority concerned, the said representation will be decided within a period of 4 weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order by passing an petitioner a writ in the for quashing the impugned Speaking Order dated State 7) passed in State of Haryana 5. Mr. Harish Nain, AAG, Haryana, who is present in Court, accepts notice for the respondents. Learned State counsel submits that in case representations dated 07.02.2024 & 7) is still pending consideration authority concerned, the said representation will be decided within a period of 4 weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order by passing an RISHU KATARIA 2026.07.07 17:53 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. CWP-14367 3. direction of the Hon’ble Single Judge, respondent Haryana Staff Selection Commission impugned Speaking Order 15.07.2024 31.05.2024 Haryana and others process stood quashed speaking order against the Operative part of the impugned Speaking Order dated 15.07.2024 (Annexure P 4. 31.05.2024 was modified vide order dated 27.03.2026 (Annexure P passed by the Division Bench in review 2023 and other connected cases 5. petitioners shall be satisfied at this stage if of with liberty their doing so, 14367-2026 -2- It is further submitted that in compliance of the aforesaid ection of the Hon’ble Single Judge, respondent Haryana Staff Selection Commission, Panchkula impugned Speaking Order bearing No. HSSC/Spk.2024/2933 dated 15.07.2024 (Annexure P-8), pointing out therein that vide judgment da 31.05.2024 passed in CWP-1563-2024 titled as ‘ Haryana and others’ and other connected matters process stood quashed. Therefore, there is no requirement to pass a speaking order against the representations submitted by the petitioners. Operative part of the impugned Speaking Order dated 15.07.2024 (Annexure P-8), reads as follows:- “xxx xxx And whereas after the judgment dated 31.05.2024, the impugned result of CET Phase II dated 05.02.2024 is quashed. Therefore, the claim of the petitioners cannot be decided at this stage and the petitioners documents/claim qua his qualification will be cons advertisement w.r.t. petitioner post will be advertised in accordance with law. Thus, in compliance of Hon dated 11.03.2024 passed in CWP No. 5560 of 2024 titled as Anoop Kumar & others v State of Haryana and representations of the petitioners are hereby decided.” It is also pointed out that thereafter the judgment dated 31.05.2024 was modified vide order dated 27.03.2026 (Annexure P passed by the Division Bench in review-application(s) file 2023 and other connected cases; and the selection process was protected. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioners submits petitioners shall be satisfied at this stage if with liberty to the petitioners to move representation their doing so, the same may be ordered to be submitted that in compliance of the aforesaid ection of the Hon’ble Single Judge, respondent No. 3-Secretary, , Panchkula, had passed the bearing No. HSSC/Spk.2024/2933 dated 8), pointing out therein that vide judgment dated 2024 titled as ‘Sukriti Malik vs. State of and other connected matters, the entire selection herefore, there is no requirement to pass a representations submitted by the petitioners. Operative part of the impugned Speaking Order dated 15.07.2024 xxx xxx And whereas after the judgment dated 31.05.2024, the impugned result of CET Phase II dated 05.02.2024 is Therefore, the claim of the petitioners cannot be decided at this stage and the petitioners documents/claim qua his qualification will be considered later on when the advertisement w.r.t. petitioner post will be advertised in Thus, in compliance of Hon’ble High Court order dated 11.03.2024 passed in CWP No. 5560 of 2024 titled as Anoop Kumar & others v State of Haryana and others, the representations of the petitioners are hereby decided.” pointed out that thereafter the judgment dated 31.05.2024 was modified vide order dated 27.03.2026 (Annexure P-9) application(s) filed in LPA-1037- and the selection process was protected. learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners shall be satisfied at this stage if the present petition is disposed representation(s) afresh; and on be ordered to be considered and decided by submitted that in compliance of the aforesaid Secretary, passed the bearing No. HSSC/Spk.2024/2933 dated ted State of selection herefore, there is no requirement to pass a representations submitted by the petitioners. Operative part of the impugned Speaking Order dated 15.07.2024 And whereas after the judgment dated 31.05.2024, the impugned result of CET Phase II dated 05.02.2024 is Therefore, the claim of the petitioners cannot be decided at this stage and the petitioners documents/claim idered later on when the advertisement w.r.t. petitioner post will be advertised in ’ble High Court order dated 11.03.2024 passed in CWP No. 5560 of 2024 titled as others, the pointed out that thereafter the judgment dated 9) disposed on by RISHU KATARIA 2026.07.07 17:53 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. CWP-14367 the concerned Order in a time bound manner. 6. 7. petition is representation(s) from today. A Authority/respondent(s) shall reasoned order, in accordance with law, within a period of the date of receipt of 8. 03.07.2026 rishu 14367-2026 -3- the concerned respondent(s)/ Competent Authority, by passing a Speaking Order in a time bound manner. Heard. Without commenting upon the merits of the case, the present petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioners representation(s) before the concerned respondent(s) from today. And on their doing so, Authority/respondent(s) shall decide the same reasoned order, in accordance with law, within a period of the date of receipt of any such representation(s). Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. 2026 Whether speaking/reasoned Whether Reportable Competent Authority, by passing a Speaking t commenting upon the merits of the case, the present with liberty to the petitioners to move fresh respondent(s) within 02 weeks nd on their doing so, the concerned Competent the same by passing a speaking and reasoned order, in accordance with law, within a period of 08 weeks from such representation(s). , shall also stand disposed of. ( NIDHI GUPTA ) JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Yes/No Competent Authority, by passing a Speaking t commenting upon the merits of the case, the present to move fresh within 02 weeks the concerned Competent by passing a speaking and 08 weeks from RISHU KATARIA 2026.07.07 17:53 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.