118 IN Mamta Rani State of Haryana and another CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE Present: Mr. Neeraj Januha, Advocate for the appellant. SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA, J. (Oral) 1. The present appeal assails the judgment passed by the Single Judge dated 06.02.2025, whereby the petitioner has been non on the ground that he had remained silent from 2019 to 2024 and approached the Court only in 2025 2. Merely because the appellant possessed higher merit as he claims, without there being any other person being impleaded as a party, we do not find any reason to take a different view as fence sitters should be allowed to remain sitting as spectator alone. T participate once they themselves have abandoned their claim for more than five years. 3. The appeal is devoid of merit and is accordingly dismissed. 4 All pending misc. application(s) also stand disposed of. 22.04.2025 rajesh 1. Whether speaking/reasoned? 2. Whether reportable? IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH LPA Date of Decision: Vs. State of Haryana and another HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPINDER SINGH NALWA Mr. Neeraj Januha, Advocate for the appellant. *** SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA, J. (Oral) The present appeal assails the judgment passed by the Single Judge dated 06.02.2025, whereby the petitioner has been non on the ground that he had remained silent from 2019 to 2024 and approached the Court only in 2025, when now the things are Merely because the appellant possessed higher merit as he claims, without there being any other person being impleaded as a party, we do not find any reason to take a different view as fence sitters should be allowed to remain sitting as spectator alone. T participate once they themselves have abandoned their claim for more than The appeal is devoid of merit and is accordingly dismissed. All pending misc. application(s) also stand disposed of. (SANJEEV (DEEPINDER SINGH NALWA 1. Whether speaking/reasoned? 2. Whether reportable? THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH LPA-1134-2025 (O&M) Date of Decision: 22.04.2025 …Appellant …Respondents SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA DEEPINDER SINGH NALWA Mr. Neeraj Januha, Advocate for the appellant. SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA, J. (Oral) The present appeal assails the judgment passed by the learned Single Judge dated 06.02.2025, whereby the petitioner has been non-suited on the ground that he had remained silent from 2019 to 2024 and approached are already settled. Merely because the appellant possessed higher merit as he claims, without there being any other person being impleaded as a party, we do not find any reason to take a different view as fence sitters should be allowed to remain sitting as spectator alone. They cannot be allowed to participate once they themselves have abandoned their claim for more than The appeal is devoid of merit and is accordingly dismissed. All pending misc. application(s) also stand disposed of. (SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA) JUDGE DEEPINDER SINGH NALWA) JUDGE : Yes/No : Yes/No learned suited on the ground that he had remained silent from 2019 to 2024 and approached Merely because the appellant possessed higher merit as he claims, without there being any other person being impleaded as a party, we do not find any reason to take a different view as fence sitters should be hey cannot be allowed to participate once they themselves have abandoned their claim for more than RAJESH KUMAR 2025.04.23 12:49 I attest the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.