Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Punjab and Haryana · body

2025 DAILYLAW 51690 (PNJ)

OM PARKASH v. STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS

CWP/12288/2025 · 2025-05-02

Vinod S Bhardwaj

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

CWP-12288-2025 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 114 CWP-12288-2025 (O&M). Date of Decision: 02.05.2025. OM PARKASH ...Petitioner Versus STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS …Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD S. BHARDWAJ ***** Present: Mr. Raman Chawla, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Tanisha Peshawaria, DAG, Haryana. VINOD S. BHARDWAJ. J (ORAL). The instant writ petition has been filed for seeking issuance of directions to the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for grant of second and third ACP which is stated to be due since 2006 and 2015-16 respectively. 2 Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner contends that similar controversy was pending before the Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court in a batch of LPAs including LPA No.1865 of 2015 titled as RAJ KUMAR ARORA 2025.05.05 09:30 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-12288-2025 (O&M) -2- ‘State of Haryana and others Vs. Parmanand and others’ being the lead case. The said Letters Patent Appeals preferred by the State of Haryana, have been dismissed vide judgment dated 05.03.2025 and the respondent State has been directed to grant the benefit of the ACPs. 3 Learned State counsel is not in a position to dispute the aforesaid judgment. 4 Accordingly, the present writ petition is disposed of in terms of judgment dated 05.03.2025 passed in LPA No.1865 of 2015 titled as ‘State of Haryana and others Vs. Parmanand and others.’ May 02, 2025 (VINOD S. BHARDWAJ) raj arora JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No RAJ KUMAR ARORA 2025.05.05 09:30 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document