112-A IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: 29th January 2026 SUNIL MALIK .…...Petitioner(s)

V/s STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS …....Respondent(s)

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHWANI KUMAR MISHRA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ROHIT KAPOOR Present Mr. Pankaj Middha, Addl. A.G., Haryana, for the applicant-respondents.

Mr. Aditya Yadav, Advocate, and Mr. Atul Bhardwaj, Advocate, for the non-applicant/petitioner.

****

ASHWANI KUMAR MISHRA, J. (Oral)

CM-73-CWP-2026 Application is allowed and the applicants-respondents are exempted from filing certified/true typed copies of the documents mentioned in the application.

CM-74-CWP-2026 Application is allowed as prayed for.

CM-75-CWP-2026

1. This application is filed by the State of Haryana seeking modification of the order dated 01.09.2025 passed by this Court in CWP-25677-2025 contending that the facts of the present case are not covered by the adjudication in CWP-16904-2021 titled as Neeraj Vs. State of Haryana and Another inasmuch as the challenge to the advertisement herein has been made after six years and there is no proper explanation for the latches occasioned in filing of the Writ Petition. It is also stated that though the non-applicant/petitioner challenged the advertisement, all those persons, who have been selected and appointed pursuant to the advertisement, have not been arrayed as party respondent to the Writ Petition.

2. Learned counsel for the non-applicant/petitioner has placed before us a reply to the application in the Court itself; the same is taken on record. Learned counsel states that once the notification itself has been quashed in the case of Neeraj (Supra), then the plea of latches cannot be pressed against the petitioner-Neeraj therein.

3. From the facts placed on record, it is apparent that the non-

applicant/petitioner has challenged the notification dated 10/11.06.2019 as well as the advertisement dated 05.07.2019 wherein 10 additional marks towards socio economic criteria and experience had been allocated. The recruitment was not only initiated in the year 2019 but has concluded long back. Various persons have already been selected and appointed. who are presently working. Neither the selected persons have been arrayed as a party-respondent, nor any plausible explanation has been furnished to file the Writ Petition after expiry of nearly six years of the accrual of cause.

4. We find that the issue of latches as well as non-impleadment of selected candidates was not a question which had arisen in the case of Neeraj (Supra). In such circumstances, we find substance in the application filed by the State of Haryana that the case herein is not covered by the adjudication in the case of Neeraj (Supra). In that view of the matter, the present application succeeds and is allowed. Order dated 01.09.2025 passed by this Court in CWP-25677-2025 is recalled. Main Writ Petition is restored to its original number & position and is taken on board today itself for hearing.

CWP-25677-2025

1. This Writ Petition is filed by the petitioner seeking quashing of notification dated 11.06.2019 whereby additional ten marks were to be allocated to the candidates under the socio economic criteria.

2. Considering the fact that the Writ Petition has been filed nearly after six years without impleading the selected candidates, as such no effective relief can be granted to the petitioners. On similar grounds, we have dismissed other Writ Petition bearing No.CWP-28194-2025 titled as Dinesh Singh Yadav Vs. State of Haryana and Others, decided on

22.09.2025. The said order is reproduced as under:-

“The short question that arises for our consideration in the facts of the case is as to whether the notification dated 11.06.2019, whereby recruitment was initiated against the posts in question by making provisions for the award of marks under the socio-economic criteria, is required to be interfered with in a petition filed in the year 2025, only because this Court has disapproved the award