PARDEEP MIGLANI AND ORS v. STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS
CWP/1091/2002 · 2025-12-08
Harpreet Singh Brar
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 139151 (PNJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 139151 (PNJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
CWP-3020- IN TH 201(2 cases)
1. Balwan Singh
State of Hary
2. Pardeep Migl
State of Hary
CORAM:
Present :
HARPREET
1. petitions. For 1
-2001 and CWP-1091-2002 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AT CHANDIGA
cases)
Singh and another VERSUS f Haryana and others
p Miglani and others VERSUS f Haryana and others HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HA
None for the petitioners. Mr. Vikrant Pamboo, Addl. AG
Mr. Prince Singh, Advocate for r REET SINGH BRAR, J. (Oral)
This order of mine shall dispos or the sake of brevity, the facts are
NJAB AND HARYANA DIGARH Date of decision:08.12.2025
CWP-3020-2001 .....Petitioner SUS
.....Responden
CWP-1091-2002 .....Petitioner SUS
.....Responden E HARPREET SINGH BRAR l. AG Haryana. te for respondent No.4. dispose of two above-mentioned writ cts are taken from CWP-3020-2001. .2025
ioners ondents
ioners ondents d writ
PUNEET CHAWLA 2025.12.09 14:32 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
CWP-3020-
2. the Constitut directing the 09.07.1998 03.08.1999 i 1999, Ajay K arrears. Furth the show cau
3. behalf of the pursuing the c
4. prosecution, s
5. cases. December 08 P.C
2
-2001 and CWP-1091-2002
The present petition(s) has been nstitution of India for issuance of a w g the respondents to treat the petition 998 and to treat the petitioner a 999 in terms of the judgment of thi ay Kumar Vs. State of Haryana, wi . Further for issuance of a writ in the n w cause notice dated 02.11.2000 being The case was called twice but of the petitioner(s). It seems that p g the case. Accordingly, the present writ pet tion, so also the pending miscellaneous
Photocopy of this order be pl
ber 08, 2025
Whether speaking/r
Whether Reportable
been filed under Article 226/227 of of a writ in the nature of mandamus etitioner as an adhoc employee w.e.f. ner as a regular employee w.e.f. of this Court passed in CWP-6479 , with all consequential benefits and n the nature of certiorari for quashing 0 being illegal and void. e but none has put in appearance on that petitioner(s) is not interested in rit petition(s) is dismissed for want of neous application, if any. be placed on the file of connected (HARPREET SINGH BRAR)
JUDGE
king/reasoned. : Yes/No ortable.
:
Yes/No
of mus w.e.f. w.e.f. 479- ts and ashing ce on sted in ant of ected RAR) PUNEET CHAWLA 2025.12.09 14:32 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document