Anita Devi Vs State of Haryana and Another — Writ and Judicial Review | Punjab & Haryana HC (2025)

Anita Devi Vs State of Haryana and Another — Writ and Judicial Review | Punjab & Haryana HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Direction to the competent authority of the respondent-State to treat the writ petition as a representation and decide the petitioner's claim by a reasoned and speaking order, strictly in accordance with law, taking into consideration the facts pleaded and the judgment in Surya Sangwan (CWP No. 31692 of 2024, decided 29.07.2025); the exercise to be completed within three months of receipt of a certified copy of the order with the writ petition and annexures.

Issue for consideration

Whether the show cause notice dated 03.12.2024 (Annexure P-11) issued by respondent No.2 calling upon the petitioner to show cause why her services should not be terminated is wholly illegal, arbitrary, unjust and unfair and in violation of the provisions of rules and law, warranting quashing. +1 more

Court's answer

With the consent of the parties, and without commenting upon the merits of the case, the writ petition is disposed of.

Ratio / Principle

The competent authority of the respondent-State is directed to treat the writ petition as a representation and decide the petitioner's claim by passing a reasoned and speaking order, strictly in accordance with law, taking into consideration the facts pleaded in the petition and the judgment rendered by this Court in Surya Sangwan (supra).

Key takeaways

The entire exercise of considering and deciding the petitioner's claim shall be completed within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order, along with a copy of the writ petition and all accompanying annexures.ratio¶¶23

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

CWP-333-2025 (Punjab and Haryana High Court, decided 15.09.2025) — Sandeep Moudgil, J. Anita Devi invoked Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking quashing of a show cause notice dated 03.12.2024 (Annexure P-11) issued by respondent No.2 calling upon her to show cause why her services should not be terminated, alleging it to be wholly illegal, arbitrary, unjust and unfair and in violation of rules and law, and further seeking stay of its operation. Counsel submitted that the issue was squarely covered by this Court's judgment in Surya Sangwan vs. State of Haryana and another, CWP No. 31692 of 2024 (decided 29.07.2025), and sought only a direction to the State to consider the claim in light of that judgment; the State counsel tendered no objection. With the consent of the parties, and without commenting on merits, the Court disposed of the petition, directing the competent authority of the respondent-State to treat the writ petition as a representation and decide the claim by a reasoned and speaking order, strictly in accordance with law, taking into consideration the facts pleaded and the Surya Sangwan judgment, the entire exercise to be completed within three months of receipt of a certified copy of the order with the writ petition and annexures.

261-5

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

CWP-333-2025 DECIDED ON: 15.09.2025

ANITA DEVI

.....PETITIONER(S)

VERSUS

STATE OF HARYANA AND ANR.

.....RESPONDENTS

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MOUDGIL

Present: Mr. Ritesh Aggarwal, Advocate and Mr. Chankirat Singh Bakshi, Advocate Mrs. Aakriti Aggarwal, Advocate for the petitioner(s)

Mr. Sushil Bhardwaj, Addl. AG. Haryana Ms. Ruchi Sekhri, Addl. AG Haryana

SANDEEP MOUDGIL, J (ORAL)

The jurisdiction of this Court has been invoked under under Article 226 of Constitution of India seeking issuance of writ in nature of certiorari seeking quashing of show cause notice dated 03.12.2024 (Annexure P-11) issued by respondent No.2 as to why her services should not be terminated, is wholly illegal, arbitrary, unjust and unfair as the same is in violation of provision of rules and law. and further seeking stay of operation of show cause notice dated 03.12.2024 till the pendency of the present petition.

Learned counsel for the petitioner(s) submits that the issue raised in the present writ petition is squarely covered by the judgment of this Court in

Surya Sangwan vs. State of Haryana and another, CWP No. 31692 of 2024, decided on 29.07.2025 . It is further submitted that the petitioner(s) would be

MEENU 2025.09.16 10:44 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

-2-

CWP-333-2025

satisfied, at this stage, if a direction is issued to the respondent-State to consider and decide the claim of the petitioner(s), as raised in the present petition, in light of the aforesaid judgment, by passing a reasoned and speaking order within a stipulated time frame.

Learned State counsel tenders no objection to the above said request made by learned counsel for the petitioner(s).

Accordingly, with the consent of the parties and without commenting upon the merits of the case, the present writ petition is disposed of. The competent authority of the respondent-State is directed to treat the present writ petition as a representation and decide the claim of the petitioner(s) by passing a reasoned and speaking order, strictly in accordance with law, taking into consideration the facts pleaded in the petition and the judgment rendered by this Court in Surya Sangwan

(supra) .

The entire exercise shall be completed within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order along with a copy of the writ petition and all accompanying annexures.

Ordered accordingly.

(SANDEEP MOUDGIL) 15.09.2025 JUDGE Meenu

Whether speaking/reasoned :Yes/No Whether reportable :Yes/No

MEENU 2025.09.16 10:44 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document