324 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ****

Date of Decision: 05.03.2026 Ram Kumar and Another ...Petitioners Versus State of Haryana and Others ...Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGMOHAN BANSAL Present:- Dr. Suresh Kumar Redhu, Advocate for the petitioners.

Mr. Vivek Chauhan, Addl. A.G., Haryana.

****

JAGMOHAN BANSAL, J. (ORAL)

1. The petitioners through instant petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India are seeking setting aside of order dated 25.11.2004 whereby their claim has been rejected. They are further seeking direction to respondent to include their name in the B-I List.

2. This is second round of litigation. On the earlier occasion, the petitioners preferred CWP No.42 of 2002 which was disposed of vide order dated 06.08.2004 with the following directions:

“The names of the petitioners were admittedly at Sr.

Nos. 11 and 18 in the merit list prepared under Rule 13.7 of the Rules (amended vide notification dated 29.9.1995). The names of the petitioners could be entered in list B-1, only if sufficient number of vacancies were available to accommodate them. The process of selection for inclusion of Constables in list B-1 under Rule 13.7 o