Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Punjab and Haryana · body

2026 DAILYLAW 34359 (PNJ)

ONKAR SINGH v. FINANCIAL COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) PUNJAB AND OTHERS

CWP/7995/2025 · 2026-07-27

Pankaj Jain

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[282] Onkar Singh Financial Commissioner (Appeals), Punjab at Chandigarh Main Civil Secretariat, Sector 1, Chandigarh and others Coram : Present: PANKAJ JAIN [1] that the order has been passed pursuant to the impugned in the present writ petition rendered infructuous. [2] aforesaid fact. [3] having been rendered infructuous. [4] disposed off 27.07.2026 ‘R. Sharma' IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-7995 Date of Decision : Onkar Singh Versus Financial Commissioner (Appeals), Punjab at Chandigarh Main Civil Secretariat, Sector 1, Chandigarh and others HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ JAIN Mr. Vikas Kumar Gupta, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Harinder Pal Singh Ishar, Addl. AG, Punjab for respondent Nos.1 to 3. Mr. Sherry K. Singla, Advocate **** PANKAJ JAIN, J. (ORAL) Counsel for the respondents submit that in view of the fact that the order has been passed pursuant to the impugned in the present writ petition rendered infructuous. Counsel for the petitioner is not in a position to dispute the aforesaid fact. Consequently, the present writ petition is having been rendered infructuous. All pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, stands disposed off. 27.07.2026 Whether speaking/ reasoned Whether reportable IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 7995-2025 (O&M) Date of Decision : 27.07.2026 …Petitioner Financial Commissioner (Appeals), Punjab at Chandigarh Main Civil Secretariat, Sector 1, ….Respondents PANKAJ JAIN Advocate for the petitioner. Singh Ishar, Addl. AG, Punjab Advocate for respondent No.4. Counsel for the respondents submit that in view of the fact that the order has been passed pursuant to the remand order, which was impugned in the present writ petition, the writ petition has been Counsel for the petitioner is not in a position to dispute the Consequently, the present writ petition is dismissed All pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, stands (PANKAJ JAIN) JUDGE : Yes/No : Yes/No Counsel for the respondents submit that in view of the fact remand order, which was has been Counsel for the petitioner is not in a position to dispute the as All pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, stands RAJNEESH SHARMA 2026.07.29 11:01 I agree to specified portions of this document