205 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** CWP-10524-2015 Date of Decision: 17.09.2025 Kitab Singh ...Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and Others ...Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGMOHAN BANSAL Present:- Mr. Karamveer Singh Banyana, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Ravi Partap Singh, DAG, Haryana. **** JAGMOHAN BANSAL, J. (ORAL) 1. The petitioner through instant petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India is seeking setting aside of orders dated 24.09.2012 (Annexure P-12), 02.12.2013 (Annexure P-14) and 27.05.2014 (Annexure P-15) whereby respondent has rejected his claim for seniority under 35% Quota. 2. Learned State counsel, at the outset, submits that claim of petitioner was considered along with case of others. The prime grievance of the petitioner was that his juniors have been promoted prior to him. The grievance of petitioner stands redressed because he has been promoted as Head Constable w.e.f. 22.11.2012 whereas his juniors namely Sanjeev Kumar and Bhim Singh have been promoted w.e.f. 26.03.2013 and 07.06.2013 respectively. He cleared Lower School Course in Batch No.52 and his seniority has been fixed as per Batch No.50. Sanjeev Kumar and Bhim Singh passed Lower School Course in PRINCE CHAWLA 2025.09.18 14:39 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-10524-2015 -2- Batch Nos.42 and 44 and their seniority has been fixed in Batch Nos.52 and 53 respectively. 3. Faced with this, learned counsel representing the petitioner submits that respondent pursuant to orders passed by this Court considered claim of petitioner and passed order dated 19.10.2009. As per said order, the petitioner was not wrongly considered under 35% Quota in 2005. He was eligible for B-1 under 35% Quota as on 01.01.2005. The respondent while refixing his seniority has not considered order dated 19.10.2009. The grievance of the petitioner would be redressed if respondents are directed to reconsider his claim as per order dated 19.10.2009 passed by Inspector General of Police, Ambala Range, Ambala Cantt. 4. Learned State counsel submits that seniority of petitioner has been refixed as per orders passed by this Court in LPA No.645 of 2013. Nevertheless, if petitioner is entitled to seniority as per order dated 19.10.2009 over and above the orders passed by this Court in aforesaid LPA, his claim would be reconsidered and an appropriate order shall be passed within three months from today. 5. In the wake of statement of both sides, the instant petition stands disposed of. (JAGMOHAN BANSAL) JUDGE 17.09.2025 Prince Chawla Whether Speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No PRINCE CHAWLA 2025.09.18 14:39 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document