Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Punjab and Haryana · body

2025 DAILYLAW 9653 (PNJ)

REKHA v. STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS

CWP/141/2021 · 2025-08-18

Vinod S Bhardwaj

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH (201) 1. CWP-141-2021 Date of Decision: 18.08.2025 Rekha --Petitioner Versus State of Haryana & others --Respondents 2. CWP-39-2021 Tasmila --Petitioner Versus State of Haryana & others --Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD S. BHARDWAJ. Present:- None for the petitioner(s). Mr. Rahul Dev, Addl. A.G., Haryana. Ms. Anjali Thakur, Advocate for respondent no.7. None for respondent no.10. *** VINOD S. BHARDWAJ.J (Oral) Learned counsel for the petitioner had sought time on 22.08.2023, whereupon the matters were adjourned to 25.08.2023, however, on that date, a written request for adjournment was circulated on behalf of learned counsel for petitioners. On the subsequent date i.e. on 25.09.2023 there was again no representation on behalf of the petitioners. On 08.01.2024 again a written request for adjournment was circulated on behalf of learned counsel for petitioners. The position remained same on 06.05.2024, 12.08.2024 as well as on 13.11.2024. On 05.05.2025 again a written request for adjournment was circulated on behalf of learned counsel LUCKY 2025.08.19 16:57 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court chandigarh CWP-141-2021 & connected petition -2- for petitioners. 2. Today, there is neither any written request for adjournment circulated on behalf of learned counsel for petitioners nor the counsel is present in Court. Even though, in the urgent matters listed today before this Court, learned counsel for petitioners had appeared. It seems that after obtaining an interim order, counsel for the petitioners are avoiding the arguments. Even though the interim order was ordered to be vacated by this Court vide order dated 05.05.2025, yet the counsel for petitioners have chosen not to enter appearance. It seems that the petitioners are no more interested in pursuing these writ petitions. 3. Present writ petitions are, accordingly, dismissed for non- prosecution. 4. All the miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. (VINOD S. BHARDWAJ) 18.08.2025 JUDGE lucky Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether Reportable: Yes/No LUCKY 2025.08.19 16:57 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court chandigarh