Disposed¶23

Jitender Kumar and Others v. State of Haryana and Others

Punjab & Haryana HC17 Jul 2025CWP/342/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

CWP-342-2023; Jitender Kumar and Others v. State of Haryana and Others; Punjab and Haryana High Court; Vinod S. Bhardwaj; seniority; separate seniority list; tentative seniority list dated 01.08.2020; Memo No.98348/ES-I dated 10.06.2022; Annexure P-8; Annexure P-9; letter dated 01.12.2022; promotion; Sub Divisional Engineer (Electrical); covered by Mohd. Zafar Iqbal Khan (CWP-6760-2020, decided 03.05.2025); disposed of in terms of earlier judgment.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of in terms of the judgment dated 03.05.2025 passed in CWP-6760-2020 (Mohd. Zafar Iqbal Khan and Others v. State of Haryana and Others); no independent directions issued in this order. ¶23

Jitender Kumar and Others Vs State of Haryana and Others — Punjab & Haryana HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶23

Issue for consideration

Whether the letter bearing Memo No.98348/ES-I dated 10.06.2022 (Annexure P-8), preparing a separate seniority list ignoring the petitioners' seniority as per the tentative seniority list dated 01.08.2020 (Annexure P-2), and the letter dated 01.12.2022 (Annexure P-9) directing proposals for promotion to the post of Sub Divisional Engineer (Electrical), are liable to be set aside.

¶16

Court's answer

The controversy raised in the writ petition is covered by the judgment dated 03.05.2025 passed by this Court in CWP-6760-2020 (Mohd. Zafar Iqbal Khan and Others v. State of Haryana and Others), a position counsel for the respondents did not dispute; accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of in terms of that judgment.

¶23

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Punjab and Haryana High Court (Vinod S. Bhardwaj, J., oral order) — CWP-342-2023, decided 17.07.2025. Petitioners (Jitender Kumar and others) sought setting aside of the letter bearing Memo No.98348/ES-I dated 10.06.2022 (Annexure P-8), whereby a separate seniority list was prepared ignoring their seniority as per the tentative seniority list dated 01.08.2020 (Annexure P-2), and of the letter dated 01.12.2022 (Annexure P-9) directing proposals for promotion to the post of Sub Divisional Engineer (Electrical) for the candidates named therein. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the controversy was covered by this Court's judgment dated 03.05.2025 in a bunch of writ petitions including CWP-6760-2020, Mohd. Zafar Iqbal Khan and Others v. State of Haryana and Others; learned counsel for the respondents did not dispute the factual and legal position. Without going further into the matter, the Court disposed of the writ petition in terms of that judgment.

¶1

IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

236

¶3

CWP-342-2023 Date of Decision: 17.07.2025

¶4

JITENDER KUMAR AND OTHERS

¶5

... Petitioners

¶6

VERSUS

¶7

STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS

¶8

... Respondents

¶9

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

¶10

Present: Mr. Jagjeet Beniwal, Advocate for the petitioners.

¶11

Mr. Rahul Dev, Addl. A.G., Haryana for respondents No.1 to 3.

¶12

Mr. Rishav Kamboj, Advocate for Dr. (Mr.) Pankaj Nanhera, Advocate for respondent No.4.

¶13

¶14

VINOD S. BHARDWAJ, J. (ORAL)

¶15

Seeking setting aside of the letter bearing Memo No.98348/ES-I

¶16

dated 10.06.2022 (Annexure P-8), whereby a separate seniority list has been prepared after ignoring the seniority of the petitioners as per tentative seniority list dated 01.08.2020 (Annexure P-2); and impugned letter dated 01.12.2022 (Annexure P-9) whereby directions issued to send the proposal for promotion to the post of Sub Divisional Engineer (Electrical) in respect of the candidates mentioned in the impugned letter dated 10.06.2022 (Annexure P-8).

¶17

RAJENDER KUMAR 2025.07.22 01:13 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order

¶18

CWP-342-2023

¶19

-2-

¶20

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the controversy in question is covered by the judgment dated 03.05.2025 passed by this Court in a bunch of writ petitions including CWP-6760-2020 titled as ‘Mohd. Zafar Iqbal

¶21

Khan and Others Versus State of Haryana and Others’.

¶22

Learned counsel for the respondents does not dispute the aforesaid factual and legal position.

¶23

Hence, without going any further into the matter, the instant writ petition is disposed of in terms of the judgment dated 03.05.2025 passed in CWP-6760-2020 titled as ‘Mohd. Zafar Iqbal Khan and Others Versus State

¶24

of Haryana and Others’ (supra).

¶25

(VINOD S. BHARDWAJ) JULY 17, 2025. JUDGE Rajender Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No

¶26

Rajender

¶27

RAJENDER KUMAR 2025.07.22 01:13 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order

Jitender Kumar and Others v. State of Haryana and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jitender Kumar and Others v. State of Haryana and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Anju Vs Building Committee (Haryana), Hon'Ble Punjab and Haryana High Court and Ors.

Noor Mohammad Vs the State of Haryana and Others

Manjeet Singh Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

Ravail Singh Vs Union of India and Others

Chandi Ram Vs State of Haryana and Others

Sube Singh Noonia Vs State of Haryana and Another