Dismissed¶¶20

Gulshan v. Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd. and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC26 Nov 2025CWP/2008/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Compassionate appointment UHBVN; Gulshan v. Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Limited; CWP-2008-2023 (O&M); dismissed for non-prosecution; Article 226 mandamus; Notification dated 02.08.2019; marriage with deceased employee disputed questions of fact; succession certificate retiral benefits; no representation; Punjab and Haryana High Court; Justice Harpreet Singh Brar.

What did the court decide?

As the case was called twice and there was no representation for the petitioner, the writ petition is dismissed for non-prosecution. ¶¶20

Gulshan Vs Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran… — Writ and Judicial Review | Punjab & Haryana HC (2025)

¶1

263

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶3

CWP-2008-2023 (O&M) Date of decision: 26.11.2025

Gulshan

....Petitioner

Versus

Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Limited and others

¶8

....Respondents

¶9

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARPREET SINGH BRAR

¶10

Present: None for the petitioner.

¶11

Mr. Hitesh Pandit, Advocate for the respondents.

¶12

HARPREET SINGH BRAR J. (Oral)

¶13

Prayer in this writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus, directing the respondents to give compassionate appointment or compassionate financial assistance to the petitioner in view of the Notification dated 02.08.2019.

¶14

Learned counsel for the respondents/Corporation, at the outset, submits that the petitioner claims to have married the deceased employee, one month prior to his death in a Temple. The petitioner is seeking compassionate appointment on the basis of her marriage with deceased employee. Further the son and mother of the deceased employee have already set up a claim with regard to retiral benefits of the deceased employee and a succession certificate has been issued in their favour by the competent Court of jurisdiction. Further the validity of the petitioner’s alleged marriage with the deceased employee

¶15

MOHD YAKUB 2025.11.26 18:01 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Punjab & Haryana High Court, Chandigarh.

¶16

-2-

¶17

CWP-2008-2023 (O&M)

¶18

involves disputed questions of fact, which cannot be adjudicated by this Court in writ proceedings. The petitioner has to invoke an appropriate remedy before the appropriate forum for the redressal of her grievance.

¶19

The case has been called twice since morning and despite that there is no representation on behalf of the petitioner. It appears that neither the petitioner nor his counsel is interested in pursuing the present petition.

¶20

In view of the above, having left with no other option, present petition is dismissed for non-prosecution.

¶21

	(HARP	REET SINGH BRAR) JUDGE
26.11.2025
yakub	Whether speaking/reasoned:	Yes/No
	Whether reportable:	Yes/No

¶22

MOHD YAKUB 2025.11.26 18:01 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Punjab & Haryana High Court, Chandigarh.

Gulshan v. Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd. and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gulshan v. Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd. and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Om Parkash Vs State of Haryana and Others

Govind Kumar and Anr. Vs State of Punjab and Others

Jatinder Singh Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Jagdish Ram and Ors. Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Brij Pal Vs State of Punjab and Others

K.K. Jain Vs State of Haryana and Another