Disposed

Anil Saini v. State of Haryana

Punjab & Haryana HC25 Feb 2025CWP/1891/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Punjab and Haryana High Court disposed of a writ petition for quashing a reservation notification. Unable to grant substantive relief due to ongoing elections, the court granted liberty to the petitioner to file a representation with the Deputy Commissioner, Rohtak.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to petitioner to file representation before Deputy Commissioner, Rohtak for grievance redressal; direction to consider same and pass reasoned order.

Anil Saini Vs State of Haryana — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Punjab & Haryana HC (2025)

¶1

CWP-1891-2025 (O&M)

¶2

116 (2^nd case) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶3

CWP-1891-2025 (O&M) Date of decision: February 25, 2025

Anil Saini

….Petitione r

versus

State of Hary a na and others

¶8

….Respondent s

¶9

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUKHVINDER KAUR

¶10

Present: - M r. Sahil Gupta, Advocate for th e petitioner.

¶11

M r. Samarth Sagar, Additional A G Haryana.

¶12

¶13

SUDHIR SINGH, J. (ORAL)

¶14

P etition herein is for issuance of a Writ in the nature of Certiorar i for quashing t he notification dated 01.01.2025 (Annexure P-1) issued by th e Commissione r and Secretary to Government o f Haryana, Urban Local Bodie s Department, w hereby Ward No.2 of the Mu n icipal Corporation, Rohtak ha s been reserved for Scheduled Caste Category.

¶15

A t the outset, learned State coun s el submits that as the process o f election in r e spect of the concerned Mu n icipal Corporation is alread y underway, th e refore, the instant writ petition has become infructuous, and n o substantive re l ief can be granted to the petitio n er.

¶16

F aced with the situation, learne d counsel for the petitioner doe s not dispute th e aforesaid; he, however, subm i ts that a liberty may be grante d

¶17

1 of 2

¶18

MAHAVIR SINGH 2025.03.03 14:34 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/ judgment

¶19

CWP-1891-2025 (O&M)

¶20

to the petitioner to file a representation before respondent No.6-Deputy Commissioner, Rohtak for redressal of his grievance, and the same be decided at the earliest.

¶21

Learned State counsel submits that in case, any such representation is moved by the petitioner, respondent No.6 shall take decision either way on the same.

¶22

Without commenting on merits of the case, the petition is disposed of with a liberty to the petitioner to make a representation before respondent No.6-Deputy Commissioner, Rohtak qua redressal of his grievance. In case, such an application is made by the petitioner, respondent No.6 shall consider the same and pass an appropriate reasoned order, in accordance with law.

¶23

Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.

¶24

(SUDHIR SINGH) JUDGE

¶25

(SUKHVINDER KAUR) JUDGE

¶26

February 25, 2025 mahavir Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether reportable: Yes/No

¶27

2 of 2

¶28

MAHAVIR SINGH 2025.03.03 14:34 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/ judgment

Anil Saini v. State of Haryana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anil Saini v. State of Haryana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Reena Vs Karamveer

Rahul Kumar Vs State of Haryana and Others

Rakesh Mittal Vs Sheetal

Rajesh Vs State of Haryana and Others

Sonia Vs Rajesh Kumar

Manju Vs Sunil