SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Headnote Court Copy Facts Arguments Court observation Judicial Analysis Case Map Category Hierarchy Table of Content
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(P&H) 130910

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Aman Chaudhary, J
Kailash Chander – Appellant
Versus
State of Haryana – Respondent
CWP-2364-2020 (O&M)|CWP-12149-2022 (O&M)|CWP-14493-2026



Important Points

The court directed the respondents to reconsider the petitioners' claims within four months, taking into account specific judicial precedents that allegedly cover the petitioners' cases, ensuring a fair and reasoned decision.

Subject

Service Law - Reconsideration of Claim

Headnote

(A) Administrative Law - Reconsideration of Claims - When a claim is squarely covered by previous judicial precedents, the authority is directed to reconsider and decide the matter in light of such judgments in a time-bound manner. (Para 1, 2)

Issues: Whether the petitioners' claims should be reconsidered in light of existing judicial precedents.

Result: Disposed

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: RK Arora, Nishant Maini, Karamveer Singh Banyana
For the Respondents: Piyush Khanna, Pritam Singh Saini, Divyansh Shukla, Sukhdeep Parmar

****

AMAN CHAUDHARY, J. (Oral)

1. Learned counsel submit that claim of the petitioners is squarely covered by the judgments passed in Partap Singh Malik and others vs. State of Haryana and others , CWP-18791-2009, decided on 18.10.2011, Ved Parkash Bali and others vs. State of Haryana and another , CWP-20057-2009, decided on 01.12.2011, Director, Treasuries and Accounts, Haryana and others vs. Shubh Karan Sharma and others , LPA-1261-2011, decided on 18.08.2011, State of Haryana and another vs. Shadi Lal Malik (deceased through his LRs) and others, LPA-604-2013, decided on 14.10.2014, Annexures P3 to P6, thus, pray that their case be reconsidered and decided in light thereof, in a timebound manner.

2. The above facts having been brought out, during the course of hearing, learned counsel for the respondents fairly state that the Authority would not be averse to having a relook at the matter and consider it taking note of the afore-judgments and decide the same, within a period of 4 months, in accordance with law, after granting opportunity of hearing to the petitioners and uninfluenced with order(s) impugned herein, which this Court has no reason to believe the authorities would not be addressed in a just, fair and reasonable manner.

3. The matter stands disposed of accordingly and if the petitioners are found entitled, grant the benefit forthwith. Needless to say, if the orders are adverse to their interest, the same shall contain reasons and they shall be free to seek legal redress thereupon.

4. Photocopy of this order be placed on the connected file(s).

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top