Dismissed¶¶20

Krishan and Another v. State of Haryana and Others

Punjab & Haryana HC11 Jul 2025CWP/8431/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Krishan v. State of Haryana; CWP-8431-2022 (O&M); Punjab & Haryana High Court at Chandigarh; decided 11.07.2025; coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Vinod S. Bhardwaj (single Judge, oral order); petitioners absent/unrepresented; dismissal for non-prosecution after five adjournments at petitioners' request; subject matter: regularisation of services, modification of Order No.21 dated 22.06.2020, dates 01.02.1996 vs 01.10.2003; related earlier petition CWP-9531-2015 and Policy of 2003; State represented by Tapan Kumar, DAG Haryana; no costs or quantum awarded.

What did the court decide?

The Court found no sufficient circumstances to accommodate the petitioners any further, the matter having been adjourned five times at the request of their counsel. ¶¶19

Krishan and Another Vs State of Haryana and Others — Punjab & Haryana HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

220

¶3

CWP-8431-2022 (O&M) Date of decision: 11.07.2025

¶4

Krishan and another ...Petitioners

¶5

VERSUS

¶6

State of Haryana and others ...Respondents

¶7

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

¶8

Present :- None for the petitioner(s).

¶9

Mr. Tapan Kumar, DAG Haryana.

¶10

¶11

VINOD S. BHARDWAJ, J. (Oral)

¶12

The instant writ petition has been filed for seeking modification of the order No.21 dated 22.06.2020 to the extent of regularisation of services of the petitioners w.e.f. 01.02.1996 instead of 01.10.2003 with all the consequential benefits.

¶13

It is noticed by this Court that when the matter was earlier taken up on 15.11.2022, on the request of the petitioner, the same was adjourned to 08.03.2023. It was adjourned on 16.10.2023 to 15.01.2024 and 14.05.2024 by order. On 14.05.2024, since there was no representation on behalf of the petitioners, the matter was adjourned to 30.07.2024. Counsel for the petitioner prayed for an adjournment even on the said date. On 25.09.2024, time was sought yet again by counsel for the petitioners and the matter was adjourned to 14.02.2025, on which such date a written request for an adjournment was circulated on behalf of the petitioners and the matter has

¶14

MANGAL SINGH 2025.07.14 12:48 I am the author of this document

¶15

¶16

220 CWP-8431-2022 (O&M)

¶17

thus been adjourned for today. Today there is no representation on behalf of the petitioners.

¶18

Learned State counsel further informs that the petitioners had themselves prayed for regularisation under the Policy of 2003 in the first round of litigation and they now want to travel beyond the relief asked for by them in the earlier CWP-9531-2015.

¶19

Considering that the matter has been adjourned as many as on five occasions on the asking of the counsel for the petitioners, I do not find that sufficient circumstances exits to accommodate the petitioners any further to advance arguments.

¶20

5. Dismissed for non-prosecution.

¶21

(VINOD S. BHARDWAJ) 11.07.2025 JUDGE Mangal Singh Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No

¶22

MANGAL SINGH 2025.07.14 12:48 I am the author of this document

Krishan and Another v. State of Haryana and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Krishan and Another v. State of Haryana and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sewa Singh Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

Kavita Devi Vs State of Haryana and Others

Jai Bhagwan Vs State of Haryana and Others

Ramesh Kumar Vs State of Haryana and Others

Phool Pati Vs State Bank of India and Ors.

Jeet Ram Vs State of Haryana and Ors.