Dismissed¶24

Sher Singh v. Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Hisar and Anr.

Punjab & Haryana HC10 Nov 2025CWP/23429/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Dismissal for want of prosecution; death of petitioner-workman (expired 30.06.2024); non-impleadment and non-substitution of legal representatives; cause of action no longer survives; liberty to legal representatives to apply for revival; unrepresented petitioner despite Registry e-mail intimation; court notice issued per order of 30.09.2025; CWP-23429-2011; Labour Court Hisar; High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh; Kuldeep Tiwari, J.; decision dated November 10, 2025.

What did the court decide?

Liberty reserved to the legal representative(s) of the deceased petitioner to file an appropriate application for revival of the writ petition, in case any grievance subsists. ¶24

Sher Singh Vs Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Hisar and Anr. — Punjab & Haryana HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

105 CWP-23429-2011 Date of Decision : November 10, 2025

SHER SINGH

-PETITIONER

V/S

PRESIDING OFFICER, LABOUR COURT, HISAR AND ANR.

¶7

-RESPONDENTS

¶8

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP TIWARI

¶9

Present: None for the petitioner.

¶10

Mr. Bhupender Singh, Addl. A.G., Haryana.

¶11

¶12

KULDEEP TIWARI, J. (ORAL)

¶13

On the previous date of hearing, i.e. 30.09.2025, this Court

¶14

passed the following order:-

¶15

“1. The petitioner remained unrepresented on the last date of hearing, which resulted in this Court directing the Registry to inform his counsel about the next date of hearing, i.e. today. Moreover, it was specifically observed that no request for adjournment shall be entertained today. However, despite learned counsel for the petitioner having been informed by the Registry, through e-mail, about today’s hearing, none has caused representation on behalf of the petitioner.

¶16

2. The petitioner is a workman, hence in order to protect his interest, let court notice be issued to him.

¶17

3. List on 10.11.2025.”

¶18

As per the office report, the petitioner expired on 30.06.2024.

¶19

No steps have been taken by his legal representative(s) to be impleaded or substituted, or to continue the proceedings. In view of this, it appears that

¶20

DEVINDER YADAV 2025.11.11 09:52 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment

¶21

¶22

CWP-23429-2011

¶23

the cause of action no longer survives.

¶24

Consequently, the instant writ petition is dismissed for want

¶25

of prosecution . However, liberty is reserved to the legal representative(s) of the deceased petitioner, in case any grievance subsists, to file an appropriate application for revival of the instant writ petition.

¶26

November	10, 2025	(KU	LDEEP TIWARI) JUDGE
devinder
	Whether speaking/reasoned	:	Yes/No
	Whether Reportable	:	Yes/No

¶27

DEVINDER YADAV 2025.11.11 09:52 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment

Sher Singh v. Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Hisar and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sher Singh v. Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Hisar and Anr.

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

Karamjit Singh Vs State of Punjab and Others

Panchayat Samiti Block Ferozepur and Others Vs Presiding Officer Industrial Tribunal and Another

Surjeet Kaur Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Mohinder Singh Vs Presiding Officer Labour Court etc.

Subhash Gupta Vs State of Punjab and Anr.

Ranjit Kaur Vs State of Haryana and Ors.