1 CWP-20919-2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 126 CWP-20919-2026 Date of Decision: 13.07.2026 Dr. Ruchira Khullar .....Petitioner VERSUS State of Haryana and others ..Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARPREET SINGH BRAR Present : Mr. Vikram Rana, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Naveen Singh Panwar, DAG Haryana-State. HARPREET SINGH BRAR, J. (Oral) 1. The present writ petition has been filed under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India for issuance of an appropriate writ or order in the nature of certiorari for quashing the suspension order dated 25.03.2026 passed by respondent No.2. Further praying for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing respondents to revoke the suspension of petitioner, reinstate her in service with all consequential benefits, treated the period of suspension as duty for all purposes. 2. Before the commencement of the arguments, learned State Counsel raises a preliminary objection with regard to the maintainability of the present writ petition and submits that the petitioner has not approached PUNEET CHAWLA 2026.07.13 16:21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 2 CWP-20919-2026 this Court with clean hands and has deliberately suppressed material facts. It is contended that the petitioner had earlier invoked the writ jurisdiction of this Court by filing CWP-11643-2026, Dr. Ruchira Khullar Versus State of Haryana and others, which was decided on 20.04.2026, wherein the petitioner had challenged the very same suspension order dated 25.03.2026, which also forms the subject matter of challenge in the present writ petition. It is further submitted that against the aforesaid order dated 20.04.2026, the petitioner preferred LPA-1443-2026, Ruchira Khullar Versus State of Haryana, which came to be decided on 29.05.2026, whereby the respondents were granted a period of three months to conclude the disciplinary proceedings initiated against the petitioner. 2.1 Learned State Counsel, therefore, submits that the present writ petition is wholly misconceived and is liable to be dismissed as not maintainable with exemplary costs on account of concealment of the earlier litigation. It is further pointed out that in paragraph No.21 of the present writ petition, the petitioner has categorically averred that no other writ petition seeking identical relief on the same cause of action has been filed before this Court, which statement is factually incorrect and amounts to suppression of material facts. 3. When confronted with the aforesaid preliminary objection and the submissions advanced by learned State Counsel, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw the present writ petition. PUNEET CHAWLA 2026.07.13 16:21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 3 CWP-20919-2026 4. In view of the above, the present petition is dismissed as withdrawn, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any. (HARPREET SINGH BRAR) JUDGE 13.07.2026 Puneet Chawla Whether speaking/reasoned. : Yes/No Whether Reportable. : Yes/No PUNEET CHAWLA 2026.07.13 16:21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document