IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

116 CWP-16338-2026 Date of Decision: 22.05.2026 Anil Kumar and others .....Petitioners VERSUS State of Haryana and others .....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARPREET SINGH BRAR Present:- Mr. Sanjiv Gupta, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Lavish, Advocate for the petitioners.

Mr. Piyush Khanna, Addl. AG Haryana.

****

HARPREET SINGH BRAR , J. (Oral)

1. The present petition has been filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India seeking issuance of an appropriate writ, order or direction, particularly in the nature of Certiorari for quashing the impugned order dated 05.05.2026 (Annexure P-6) passed by the Deputy Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Kurukshetra, on the ground that the same is void ab initio, illegal and has been passed in contravention of Section 27 of the Haryana Co-operative Societies Act, 1984.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner, inter alia, contends that the petitioners were appointed on contractual/temporary posts such as Chowkidar, Salesman, Operator and Booth Operator in Khurana PACS Ltd., Khurana pursuant to a valid agenda dated 08.09.2023 approved by the Assistant Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Kaithal. While the petitioners were working continuously, the Deputy Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Kurukshetra vide order dated 19.02.2025/24.02.2025 (Annexure P-1) rescinded the resolution without issuing any notice to the petitioners. The appeal filed against the said order was accepted on 21.07.2025 (Annexure P-5) and the matter was remanded back, however, the Deputy Registrar again passed the impugned order dated 05.05.2026 (Annexure P-6) on vague and unsupported allegations. The petitioners rely upon judgments of this Court and the decision relating to village Kurar to contend that the Deputy Registrar has no power to rescind resolutions pertaining to temporary appointments.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners has limited his prayer to the extent that the present petition be treated as a comprehensive representation and the same be decided in a time bound manner in light of judgment rendered by this Court in Shiv Kumar and others vs. State of Haryana and others, CWP No.14838 of 2010, decided on 16.05.2012, Annexure P-2, by passing a speaking order after affording the petitioners an opportunity of being heard.

4. Learned State counsel, appearing on advanced notice, submits that the grievance raised by the petitioners in the present writ petition would be considered by passing a speaking order in accordance with the law by respondent(s)/competent authority.

5. Therefore, in view of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties, the present writ petition is disposed of and the respondent No.1/competent authority is directed to treat the writ petition as a comprehensive representation and consider the claim of the petitioners in light of the judgment rendered by this Supreme Court in Shiv Kumar and others (supra) and pass a speaking order after affording them an opportunity to be heard, within a period of 03 months from the date of receiving a certified copy of this order. Further, the decision taken thereof shall be conveyed to the petitioners. Needless to say, if the petitioners are found entitled to the relief sought, the same shall be granted forthwith by the respondents.

6. In the meantime, till the matter is adjudicated by respondent No.1/competent authority, there shall be status quo with regard to the service of the petitioners

7. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall also stand disposed of.

(HARPREET SINGH BRAR)

JUDGE

22.05.2026

parul verma

Whether speaking/reasoned. : Yes/No

Whether Reportable. : Yes/No