LPA-1871 of 2026 (O&M) :1: IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 118 LPA-1871 of 2026 (O&M) Date of Decision: 22.07.2026 BIJENDER ... Appellant VERSUS STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS ....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUVIR SEHGAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPINDER SINGH NALWA Present: Mr. Bhuwnesh Lakhera, Advocate for the appellant. ***** DEEPINDER SINGH NALWA , J. CM-4555-LPA-2026 This application has been filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act read with Section 151 CPC for condonation of delay of 50 days in filing the appeal. For the reasons mentioned in the application, which is duly supported by an affidavit of the applicant-appellant, delay of 50 days in filing of the appeal is condoned. RIMPAL RANI 2026.07.24 09.29 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document LPA-1871 of 2026 (O&M) :2: LPA -1871 of 2026 1. The present Letters Patent Appeal has been filed against the judgment dated 25.02.2026 passed by the learned Single Judge whereby, the writ petition filed by the appellant-petitioner has been dismissed. 2. The brief facts of the case are that a vacancy arose on account of retirement of one Jainarayan for the post of Chowkidar in village Bariawas, District Rewari. Accordingly, five candidates were called for personal hearing before the competent authority i.e. respondent No.4. The appellant was also one of the said five candidates. The Deputy Commissioner, Mini Secretariat, District Rewari-respondent No.3, on the basis of the recommendation made by respondent No.4 appointed Gajraj- respondent No.6 as Chowkidar vide order dated 04.11.2025. 3. Aggrieved against the above said order dated 04.11.2025, an appeal was filed by the appellant before respondent No.2. The case set up by the appellant before respondent No.2 was that he being the son of earlier Chowkidar namely Jainarayan, having no criminal records and also being an educated person, had a preference over respondent No.6 for the purpose of appointment on the post of Chowkidar. Accordingly, the appellant was entitled to be considered for appointment on the post Chowkidar instead of respondent No.6. However, the above said appeal was dismissed by respondent No.2 vide order dated 29.12.2025. 4. Aggrieved against the above said order dated 29.12.2025 the appellant filed a civil writ petition in this Court being CWP No.4297 of 2026. The above said writ petition was also dismissed by the learned Single RIMPAL RANI 2026.07.24 09.29 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document LPA-1871 of 2026 (O&M) :3: Judge vide judgment dated 25.02.2026. A perusal of the judgment passed by learned Single Judge would show that after taking into consideration the eligibility criteria for appointment as Chowkidar, in light of the Haryana Chowkidara (Watchman) Rules, 2011 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules'), no illegality or perversity was pointed out in the order dated 29.12.2025 passed by respondent No.2. 5. Aggrieved against the judgment dated 25.02.2026 passed by the learned Single Judge, the appellant has filed the present appeal. 6. We have heard learned counsel for the appellant and have gone through the case file. 7. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of appellant submits that the respondents have not considered the fact that the appellant's father had retired from the post of Chowkidar and is also elder in age than respondent No.6, as such, the appellant is entitled to be appointed on the post of Chowkidar, over respondent No.6. 8. In regard to the contention raised by learned counsel appearing on behalf the appellant is concerned, a perusal of the facts of the case would show that the eligibility criteria for the purpose of appointment as Chowkidar is governed under Rule 3 of the said Rules. A perusal of the above said rule would show that it does not mention that a preference has to be given to the son of previous Chowkidar. Also, it nowhere mentions that a candidate who is elder in age has to be given preference for the purpose of appointment on the said post. A perusal of the order dated 04.11.2025 passed by respondent No.3, whereby respondent No.6 was appointed as a RIMPAL RANI 2026.07.24 09.29 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document LPA-1871 of 2026 (O&M) :4: Chowkidar, would show that the relevant factors have been taken into consideration while appointing respondent No.6 on the post of Chowkidar by the Competent Authority. It is well settled that in case of appointment on the post of Chowkidar, the decision of the Competent Authority has to be respected until and unless there is an allegation of malafide. However, a perusal of the facts of the present case would show that there is no allegation of malafide levelled by the appellant against the appointing authority. 9. In light of the above said facts, this Court find no illegality and perversity in the judgment dated 25.02.2026 passed by the learned Single Judge. Accordingly, the present appeal is dismissed. 10. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand(s) disposed of accordingly. (SUVIR SEHGAL) (DEEPINDER SINGH NALWA) JUDGE JUDGE 22.07.2026 Rimpal Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No RIMPAL RANI 2026.07.24 09.29 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document