Punjab and Haryana High Court
CWP/28291/2026 of OM PARKASH Vs STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS on 10 September 2026
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH 115 CWP-28291-2026 Date of Decision: 10.09.2026 OM PARKASH ... Petitioner VERSUS STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS ... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMAN CHAUDHARY. **** Present: Mr. Sandeep K. Tada and Mr. Kapil Saharan, Advocates for the petitioner.
IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT
CHANDIGARH
CWP-28291-2026
Date of Decision: 10.09.2026
OM PARKASH
... Petitioner
VERSUS
STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS
... Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMAN CHAUDHARY.
****
Present:
Mr. Sandeep K. Tada and Mr. Kapil Saharan, Advocates for the petitioner.
Mr. Udit Garg, Addl. A.G., Haryana.
****
AMAN CHAUDHARY, J. (ORAL)
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. Learned arguing counsel submits that in the speaking order dated 04.07.2025, Annexure P-2, the petitioner has been found entitled for regularization as per Policy dated 16.06.2014 and 18.06.2014, however, the benefit thereunder was not granted to him on account of the matter being subjudice before Hon’ble the Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No.1996 of 2024 titled as ‘Madan Singh and Others Versus State of Haryana and Others’, which has now been disposed of vide order dated 16.04.2026. He submitted representations dated 13.05.2026 and 18.08.2026, Annexures P-3 and P-4 to the respondents relying upon the aforesaid judgment, which have yet not evoked any response. He, on instructions, prays that a direction may be given to the respondents to decide the latest representation, Annexure P-4 in a time bound manner. RAJENDER KUMAR 2026.09.10 15:24 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
CWP-28291-2026
2. Learned State counsel has no objection to the limited prayer made.
3. In view of the above and without commenting upon the merits of the case, this petition is hereby disposed of with a direction to the respondents to consider and decide the aforesaid representation, Annexure P-4 expeditiously in accordance with law, taking note of the relevant policy as also the judgment referred to hereinabove and after granting opportunity of hearing to him, which this Court has no reason to believe the authorities would not address in a just, fair and reasonable manner.
4. Upon doing so, if found entitled, grant the benefit forthwith. Needless to say, if the orders are adverse to his interest, the same shall contain reasons and the petitioner shall be free to seek legal redress thereupon.
(AMAN CHAUDHARY) SEPTEMBER 10, 2026.
JUDGE Rajender
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No
Whether reportable
: Yes/No RAJENDER KUMAR 2026.09.10 15:24 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document