Disposed¶35

Dr Gajender Yadav Alias Gajender Singh v. Director General Higher Education Department Haryana and Others

Punjab & Haryana HC16 May 2025CWP/3604/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

CWP-3604-2025 | Dr. Gajender Yadav alias Gajender Singh v. Director General, Higher Education Department, Haryana and others | High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh | Kuldeep Tiwari, J. (oral) | decided May 16, 2025 | enquiry report; enquiry committee; irregularities; Mahashe Sedu Ram Shiksha Samiti, Kanina, District Mahendergarh; contempt/show-cause notice to respondent no.1; affidavit of Prabhjot Singh, DG Technical Education; grievance resolved; writ petition closed/disposed; liberty to seek legal recourse.

What did the court decide?

The petitioner's grievance stands resolved because the enquiry committee has already concluded the enquiry and submitted its report; therefore no further direction is required to be passed. ¶34

Dr Gajender Yadav Alias Gajender Singh Vs Director General Higher Education Department Haryana and Others — Punjab & Haryana HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

113 CWP-3604-2025 Date of Decision : May 16, 2025

¶3

DR. GAJENDER YADAV ALIAS GAJENDER SINGH

¶4

-PETITIONER

¶5

V/S

¶6

DIRECTOR GENERAL, HIGHER EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, HARYANA AND OTHERS

¶7

-RESPONDENTS

¶8

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP TIWARI

¶9

Present: Mr. Gaurav Mohunta, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶10

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

¶11

Mr. Arjun Pratap Atma Ram, Advocate for the respondent(s).

¶12

¶13

KULDEEP TIWARI, J. (ORAL)

¶14

The prayer wrapped in the instant writ petition appertains to issuance of directions upon the respondents No.3 to 5/Committee, as constituted by the respondent No.2, to conclude and submit the enquiry report with regard to the irregularities carried out by Mahashe Sedu Ram Shiksha Samiti, Kanina, District Mahendergarh.

¶15

When the instant writ petition came up for hearing on 10.03.2025, this Court had, without issuing notice, directed the learned State counsel to, after having instructions from the respondent No.1Director General, Higher Education Department, inform this Court as to how much time is required to conclude the enquiry launched on the complaint made by the petitioner.

¶16

DEVINDER YADAV 2025.05.19 10:00 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment

¶17

CWP-3604-2025

¶18

¶19

When the directions (supra) could not be complied with by the learned State counsel, on account of him being not purveyed the requisite information by the respondent No.1, this Court was led to pass the following order on 24.04.2025:-

¶20

“The compliance of order dated 10.03.2025, has not been made yet.

¶21

On the last date of hearing, i.e. 27.03.2025, learned State counsel had sought an adjournment to make compliance of the order (supra). Today, learned State counsel informs this Court that despite making repeated efforts to have instructions, from respondent no.1- Director General, Higher Education Department (Technical Education), Haryana, no information was provided to him.

¶22

In these circumstances, this Court is left with no other option except to issue notice upon respondent no.1, to explain, as to why the contempt proceedings may not be initiated against him/her for not providing apt instructions as sought by this Court vide order (supra), by filing a specific affidavit, on or before the next date of hearing positively.

¶23

In case, no response is filed to the show cause notice by respondent no.1, he/she shall cause his/her personal appearance before this Court.

¶24

Adjourned to 03.05.2025.

¶25

To be shown in the urgent list.

¶26

It is made clear that no further request for an adjournment shall be entertained on the next date of hearing, on behalf of either of the parties.

¶27

The office of Advocate General, Haryana, as well as the Registry of this Court, are directed to convey this order to respondent no.1, forthwith.”

¶28

In deference to the directions enclosed in the hereinabove

¶29

extracted order, the learned State counsel, on 03.05.2025, filed the affidavit of Mr. Prabhjot Singh, Director General, Technical Education

¶30

DEVINDER YADAV 2025.05.19 10:00 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment

¶31

¶32

CWP-3604-2025

¶33

Department, Haryana, before this Court, which was taken on record. Moreover, this affidavit was accompanied by the report of the enquiry committee.

¶34

Since the grievance sketched by the petitioner in the instant writ petition has already been resolved, inasmuch as, the enquiry committee has already concluded the enquiry and submitted its report, therefore, no further direction is required to be passed. Hence, the instant writ petition is closed. However, if any of the parties fetches any grievance from the enquiry report (supra), it is at liberty to take the apposite legal recourse for redressal thereof.

¶35

6. Disposed of accordingly.

¶36

May 16, 2025	(KU	LDEEP TIWARI) JUDGE
devinder
Whether speaking/reasoned	:	Yes/No
Whether Reportable	:	Yes/No

¶37

DEVINDER YADAV 2025.05.19 10:00 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment

Dr Gajender Yadav Alias Gajender Singh v. Director General Higher Education Department Haryana and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dr Gajender Yadav Alias Gajender Singh v. Director General Higher Education Department Haryana and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ompal Vs State of Haryana and Others

M/S Rajendera Electric Works Vs State of Haryana and Others

Mohinder Paul Goswami Vs U T Chandigarh and Others

Indal Kumar Vs State of Haryana and Others

Surinder Singh Rihal Vs Registrar of Trademarks and Another

Shalender Sharma and Anr. Vs District Registrar, Firms and Society and Ors.