Dismissed¶21

Hardeep Singh v. Union of India & Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC2 Apr 2025CWP/1308/2000

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

CWP-1308-2000 (O&M); High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh; decided 02.04.2025 by Vinod S. Bhardwaj, J.; writ petition dismissed for non-prosecution after ~25 years pendency; petitioner Hardeep Singh vs Union of India and Others; removal from service orders dated 26.11.1998 and 25.08.1999; prayer for reinstatement from back date and admissible financial benefits; petitioner untraceable, counsel no longer practising; liberty to seek restoration; miscellaneous applications disposed of; no statutory provisions or case law cited; non-reportable procedural disposal.

What did the court decide?

Liberty granted to the petitioner to seek restoration of the writ petition; no substantive relief granted. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, disposed of. ¶21

Hardeep Singh Vs Union of India & Ors. — Punjab & Haryana HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

202

¶3

CWP-1308-2000 (O&M) Date of decision: 02.04.2025

HARDEEP SINGH

......Petitioner

VERSUS

UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

¶8

.......Respondents

¶9

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD S. BHARDWAJ

¶10

*********

¶11

Present: - None for the petitioner.

¶12

Mr. Lalit K. Gupta, Advocate for respondents No. 1 to 3-Union of India.

¶13

¶14

VINOD S. BHARDWAJ, J. (Oral)

¶15

The instant writ petition had been filed in the year 2000 against the order dated 26.11.1998 and 25.08.1999 whereby the petitioner had been removed from service. A further prayer had been sought for directing the respondents to reinstate the petitioner from back date and to also pay the admissible financial benefits.

¶16

The matter was admitted vide order dated 26.09.2001 and was thereafter listed on 13.08.2024. The Counsel representing the petitioner had intimated that he is no longer a practicing Advocate, hence, notice was ordered to be sent to the petitioner about the listing of the case for hearing. A report was received where the notice had not been received back served or VISHAL SHARMA 2025.04.04 18:23 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶17

CWP-1308-2000 (O&M) -2-

¶18

otherwise. Accordingly, on the next date of hearing i.e. 11.11.2024, the matter was adjourned to await service.

¶19

On resumed hearing, it has been informed that as per the service report, the petitioner is not residing at the said address. Since the services of the petitioner stand terminated, his current whereabouts may not even be known to the respondents.

¶20

No purpose would be served by keeping the said case pending.

¶21

Dismissed for non-prosecution. Liberty is, however, granted to the petitioner to seek restoration of the present writ petition, in case he intends to pursue the case any further.

¶22

All the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, are also disposed of.

¶23

APRIL 02, 2025	(VI	NOD S. BHARDWAJ) JUDGE
Vishal Sharma
	Whether speaking/reasoned Whether Reportable	: Yes/No : Yes/No

¶24

VISHAL SHARMA 2025.04.04 18:23 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Hardeep Singh v. Union of India & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hardeep Singh v. Union of India & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Manjinder Singh Bajwa Vs Union of India and Others

Satish Kumar Ex Constable Vs Union of India and Others

Satish Kumar and Others Vs State of Haryana and Another

Prem Devi Vs State of Haryana and Others

Gurlabh Singh Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

Karnail Singh Vs State of Haryana & Ors.