BALKAR SINGH AND ORS v. STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS
RA-CW/198/2026 · 2026-07-22
Jagmohan Bansal
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 32844 (PNJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 32844 (PNJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
254
RA-CW-198-2026 (O&M) in CWP-11258-2012
BALKAR SINGH AND ORS V/S STATE OF HARYANA AND ANR.
Present:- Ms. Tanu Bedi, Advocate
for the review applicant/respondent No.2
Mr. Abhinav Kalia, DAG Haryana
Mr. A.P. Bhandari, Advocate and
Mr. Bhar Gavi, Advocate for non-applicants/petitioners
*** CM-6013-CWP-2026
1.
Allowed as prayed for. CM-6014-CWP-2026
2.
The instant application has been filed by the applicant seeking condonation of delay in filing the review application.
3.
For the reasons stated in the application and with the consent of respondent, the same is allowed and delay in filing the review application is hereby condoned. RA-CW-198-2026
4.
Learned counsel for applicant/respondent No.2 submits that on 08.07.2025 non-applicants/petitioners’ application for listing the main case was allowed and case was taken up in the urgent motion. The State was one of the respondents, however, was unaware of factual position. It was applicant/respondent No.2 who was contesting respondent and aware of factual position. The matter was finally heard and disposed of on the basis of arguments of petitioners and the fact that State counsel could not controvert petitioners’ submissions. The applicant needs to be heard. The present matter is not squarely covered by judgment dated 26.07.2024 of this Court passed in bunch of appeals including LPA1892-2019 titled as State of Haryana & Ors. Vs. Jai Bhagwan.
DEEPAK BISSYAN 2026.07.23 10:09 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this
order/judgment
5.
Learned counsel for non-applicant/petitioner submits that applicant/respondent No.2 chose not to attend the hearing, thus, present review application deserves to be dismissed.
6.
Heard the arguments and perused the record.
7.
From the perusal of record, it is evident that applicant/respondent No.2 was pursuing the matter. On 08.07.2025, on the request of petitioners, the matter was taken up in urgent motion. There was no representation of applicant/respondent No.2 on the said date. The matter needs to be re-heard. The applicant deserves to be heard. Accordingly,
order dated 08.07.2025 is hereby recalled.
8.
The main petition is ordered to be listed for hearing on 06.08.2026, as per roster.
(JAGMOHAN BANSAL) 22.07.2026
JUDGE Deepak DPA
DEEPAK BISSYAN 2026.07.23 10:09 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this
order/judgment