Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Punjab and Haryana · body

2025 DAILYLAW 64520 (PNJ)

VIRENDER KUMAR ASSISTANT v. STATE OF HARYANA & ORS

CWP/22543/2015 · 2025-09-03

Jagmohan Bansal

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

207 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** CWP-22543-2015 Date of Decision: 03.09.2025 Virender Kumar ...Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and Others ...Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGMOHAN BANSAL Present:- Mr. Nikhil Lather, Advocate for Mr. Anurag Goyal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Ashok Kumar Khubbar, Addl. A.G., 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 notice dated 28.07.2015 (Annexure P-7) and order dated 25.09.2015 (Annexure P-9) whereby petitioner has been made to retire at the age of 55 years. 2. The petitioner joined Haryana Police Force as Constable on 06.02.1984. He was made to retire on attaining the age of 55 years. The impugned order was passed on 25.09.2015. It means the petitioner served respondent for more than 30 years. 3. The respondent by impugned notice/order has retired the petitioner on attaining the age of 55 years. The said order has been passed in exercise of power conferred by Rule 9.18 of Punjab Police Rules, 1934 (as applicable to State of Haryana) (in short ‘PPR’) read with Rule 5.32 of Punjab Civil Service Rules, Vol-II (as applicable to Haryana). The PRINCE CHAWLA 2025.09.03 16:28 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-22543-2015 -2- impugned orders were passed on 25.09.2015. Had the impugned order not been passed, the petitioner would have worked for three more years. He was part of Haryana Police Force and his service was pensionable, thus, he must have received pension which is 50% of last drawn salary. He had not worked during said period. 4. At this stage, this Court does not find it appropriate to set aside notice and impugned order whereby petitioner was made to retire. 5. Accordingly, the instant petition is hereby dismissed. (JAGMOHAN BANSAL) JUDGE 03.09.2025 Prince Chawla Whether Speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No PRINCE CHAWLA 2025.09.03 16:28 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document