Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Punjab and Haryana · body

2025 DAILYLAW 74409 (PNJ)

NAGENDER SINGH v. STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS

CWP/29362/2018 · 2025-08-19

Jagmohan Bansal

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

210 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** CWP-29362-2018 Date of Decision: 19.08.2025 Nagender Singh ...Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and Others ...Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGMOHAN BANSAL Present:- Dr. Suresh Kumar Redhu, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Ravi Partap Singh, DAG, Haryana. **** JAGMOHAN BANSAL, J. (ORAL) 1. On 20.11.2018, the following order was passed: “Learned counsel submits that vide impugned order/show cause notice dated 12.11.2018 Annexure P-26, the service benefits of the petitioner i.e. promotion list 'E' and promotion to the rank of Sub Inspector have been sought to be withdrawn. Learned counsel has referred to order dated 19.02.2016 whereby this Court stayed the proceedings before the trial Court in CRM-M-4646-2016 and thus, by merely mentioning that the charges against the petitioner under Section 219/323/506/1420-B IPC are still stand, the impugned show cause notice is liable to be set aside. Notice of motion for 01.05.2019. In the meantime, proceedings qua show cause notice dated 12.11.2018 (Annexure P-26) shall remain stayed.” 2. Dr. Suresh Kumar Redhu, Advocate submits that petitioner has retired in March’ 2022 on attaining the age of superannuation. He has PRINCE CHAWLA 2025.08.20 11:51 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-29362-2018 -2- retired as Sub Inspector (SI). He was eligible for further promotion. He may not be reverted to the rank of Assistant Sub Inspector (ASI). He further submits that he may not be denied any benefit which he has already availed. 3. Mr. Ravi Partap Singh, DAG, Haryana vehemently opposed the aforesaid prayer of the petitioner. 4. Considering the fact that petitioner has retired as SI; by impugned show cause notice he was called upon to show cause as to why he should not be reverted to the rank of ASI; he is seeking protection of benefits already availed, this Court finds it just and reasonable to make absolute interim order dated 20.11.2018. It is made clear that respondent would be free to take action in accordance with law, if he is convicted in the criminal case. 5. In view of the above, the instant petition stands disposed of. (JAGMOHAN BANSAL) JUDGE 19.08.2025 Prince Chawla Whether Speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No PRINCE CHAWLA 2025.08.20 11:51 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document