217 CHANDIGARH LPA-1384-2023 (O&M) Date of Decision: 23.09.2025 AMAR NATH ... APPELLANT VS. STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS .. RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHWANI KUMAR MISHRA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ROHIT KAPOOR Present: Appellant-in-person. Mr. Pankaj Mulwani, Sr. DAG, Haryana. Mr. S.K.Garg Narwana, Senior Advocate with Mr. H.S.Gill, Advocate, for respondents No. 2 to 4. Mr. Rahul Gahlian, Advocate for Mr. Shokeen S.Verma, Advocate, for respondent No.5. **** ASHWANI KUMAR MISHRA , J. (ORAL) CM-3527-LPA-2023 Prayer in the present application is for condonation of delay of 41 days in filing the present appeal. For the reasons stated in the application, the same is allowed and delay of 41 days in filing the present appeal is condoned. LPA-1384-2023 (O&M) This appeal arises out of an order dated 06.07.2023 passed by the learned Single Judge, wherein following directions have been issued:- “This petition has been filed seeking a writ of certiorari for quashing the impugned memorandum dated 25.09.2020 issued by respondent No.2 under Rule 4 read with Rule 7 of the Haryana Civil Services (Punishment and Appeal) Rules, 2016 for major penalty, and for issuing a writ of mandamus directing respondent SMRITI 2025.09.26 12:32 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment LPA-1384-2023 (O&M) -2- No.2 to release petitioner’s salary with interest from the month September 2020 onwards. A direction has also been sought to the respondents authorities to issue confirmation/ regularization order of the petitioner as he has already completed two years probation period. 2. Learned counsel representing the University states that the memorandum dated 25.09.2020 issued to the petitioner has already been dropped, and no disciplinary proceedings under the said memorandum are pending against him. He further states that the petitioner’s salary from September 2020 onwards has also been released to him as per directions of this Court dated 28.04.2021, and he is being regularly paid salary. He also states that the petitioner’s case for confirmation shall be considered and finally decided by the competent authority within three months from today, and his case for promotion shall thereupon be considered in accordance with rules. 3. It is further submitted by learned counsel for the University that in case any of the grievances of the petitioner has still not been redressed, like not being allowed to work in the Department independently or assigned Operation Theatre and Out Patient Department duties etc., he is at liberty to make a representation to respondent No.3/Director of the Institute in that regard, which shall be expeditiously considered and decided in accordance with law. 4. In view of the statements made by learned counsel for the University, the petition does not survive, and, accordingly, stands disposed of. 5. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, stand disposed of, as having been rendered infructuous.” Review application filed thereafter has been rejected on 06.09.2023. Pursuant to the previous orders passed, an affidavit has been filed by the Registrar stating that not only the proceedings against the appellant have been dropped, but by a specific order passed by the competent authority, the appellant's services have also been confirmed vide order dated 12.09.2025. So far as the grievance relating to appellant's claim for promotion is concerned, it has been rejected vide order dated 12.09.2025. SMRITI 2025.09.26 12:32 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment LPA-1384-2023 (O&M) -3- The primary grievance of the appellant with regard to non- confirmation of his services despite completion of probation stands redressed in view of the subsequent order dated 12.09.2025, passed by the competent authority. So far as claim for promotion is concerned, it has been rejected by a specific order which at best constituted a fresh cause of action for the appellant, if he wishes to challenge it. No further relief in the appeal can thus be granted. The appeal is accordingly disposed of by recording the stand of the respondent(s) that the services of the appellant stand confirmed on satisfactory completion of probation. It is also made clear that the appellant shall be at liberty to challenge the order by which his claim for promotion has been denied in appropriate proceedings. All pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. (ASHWANI KUMAR MISHRA) JUDGE (ROHIT KAPOOR) JUDGE 23.09.2025 smriti Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether Reportable : Yes/No SMRITI 2025.09.26 12:32 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment