Dismissed¶25

Urmil Rani v. State of Haryana & Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC25 Jul 2025LPA/214/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Dismissal of LPA for want of prosecution; death of appellant during pendency; consequential relief to legal representatives (LRs) left undecided; Single Judge judgment dated 20.01.2017 holding appointment of Lecturer (Hindi, permanent, grade 2200-4000) contrary to law; Division Bench interim stay dated 11.07.2017; affidavit of respondent No.4/Management on regular salary payment and reimbursement by State authorities; non-appearance of appellant's counsel; High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh; State of Haryana; Ashwani Kumar Mishra J. (author), Kuldeep Tiwari J.; decided 25.07.2025.

What did the court decide?

None; appeal dismissed for want of prosecution and pending miscellaneous application(s) disposed of accordingly. ¶25

Urmil Rani Vs State of Haryana & Ors. — Punjab & Haryana HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

LPA-214-2017 (O&M) 1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶3

(208) LPA-214-2017 (O&M) Date of Decision : 25.07.2025

¶4

Dr. (Mrs.) U rmil Rani

¶5

…Appellant

¶6

Vers u s

¶7

State of Ha r yana and others

¶8

...Respondents

¶9

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHWANI KUMAR MISHRA HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP TIWARI

¶10

Present: None for the appellant.

¶11

Mr. Pankaj Middha, Addl. AG , Haryana.

¶12

Mr. Amit Rao, Advocate for Mr. Anurag Goyal, Advocate fo r respondent No.3. Mr. R.K. Malik, Sr. Advocate w ith Mr. Varun Veer Chauhan, Ad v ocate for respondent No.4.

¶13

¶14

ASHWANI KUMAR MISHRA, J. (ORAL)

¶15

This Court, vide order dated 04.02.2025, had passed t he hereinafter e xtracted order, upon the instant appeal :-

¶16

“It is stated that the ap p ellant expired on 09.04.2019. T ill she expired, she was wo r king in the college where she w as appointed initially as L ecturer on permanent basis in Hindi department in the grade of 2200-4000. H er appointment was treat e d as irregular by the Commi t tee who again advertised t h e post on the premise that at t he time of selection, the r epresentation of the Governm e nt was not proper. Resultantly, the deceas e d appellant was asked to app e ar again for interview w h ich she challenged before t his Court, and an interim order was passed by this Court restraining the respond e nts from terminating her servi c es. She continued to perfor m her duties till the judgment da t ed

¶17

MANPREET SINGH 2025.07.28 15:57 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment

¶18

LPA-214-2017 (O&M)

¶19

¶20

20.01.2017 was passe d by the learned Single Ju d ge holding her appointme n t to be contrary to law. The s a id judgment passed by th e Single Judge was challenged in LPA, and an interim o r der was passed by this Court on 11.07.2017 staying the operation of the order passed by the Single Judge.

¶21

In the circumstances, the only issue required to be examined by this Court i s whether any consequential re l ief is to be given to the L Rs relating to the death of t he deceased writ petitioner .

¶22

The learned Senior C o unsel appearing for respond e nt No.4/Management woul d apprise this Court by getting an affidavit from the Man a gement as to whether the regular salary was being paid t o the writ petitioner, and whet h er the salary was being r e imbursed by the State authori t ies for the intervening period.

¶23

Let the matter come up a gain on 10.03.2025.”

¶24

Pursuant to the order (supra), an affidavit has been filed by t he learned co u nsel for the respondent No. 4 , stating therein, that no furt h er grievance s u rvives in the instant appeal.

¶25

Despite the above statement made by learned counsel for t he respondent No.4, no one has caused appe a rance on behalf of the appell a nt, today in th e Court. 4. Consequently, the instant a p peal is dismissed for want of

¶26

prosecution .

¶27

Pending miscellaneous applic a tion(s), if any, stand disposed of accordingl y .

¶28

(ASHWANI KUMAR MISHRA) JUDGE

¶29

(KULDEEP TIWARI) JUDGE

¶30

July 25, 20 2 5 Manpreet

¶31

Whether speaking/reaso n ed : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No

¶32

MANPREET SINGH 2025.07.28 15:57 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment

Procedural history

How this case reached the court

AI extract

Order under challenge
Judgment dated 20.01.2017 of the learned Single Judge holding the appellant's appointment to be contrary to law, challenged in this LPA.¶20
Learned Single Judge (High Court of Punjab and Haryana) · 20.01.2017
Prior proceeding
The deceased appellant worked in the college where she was appointed initially as Lecturer on permanent basis in the Hindi department in the grade of 2200-4000.¶16
Prior proceeding
Her appointment was treated as irregular by the Committee, which again advertised the post.¶16
Prior proceeding
The re-advertisement proceeded on the premise that, at the time of selection, the representation of the Government was not proper.¶16
Prior proceeding
The deceased appellant was asked to appear again for interview, which she challenged before this Court.¶16
Prior proceeding
An interim order was passed by this Court restraining the respondents from terminating her services.¶16
Prior proceeding
She continued to perform her duties till the judgment dated 20.01.2017 was passed by the learned Single Judge (completion of the date grounded in the impugned-order span of para 20, the paragraph breaking at the page break).¶16
Prior proceeding
The said judgment of the Single Judge was challenged in this LPA.¶20
Prior proceeding
An interim order was passed by this Court on 11.07.2017 staying the operation of the order passed by the Single Judge.¶20
Prior proceeding
Vide order dated 04.02.2025, this Court recorded (in the extracted order) that the appellant had expired on 09.04.2019.¶16
Prior proceeding
By the order dated 04.02.2025, this Court identified the only issue for examination as whether any consequential relief is to be given to the LRs relating to the death of the deceased writ petitioner.¶21
Prior proceeding
The learned Senior Counsel for respondent No.4/Management was to apprise this Court by getting an affidavit from the Management as to whether the regular salary was being paid to the writ petitioner.¶22
Prior proceeding
The affidavit was also to state whether the salary was being reimbursed by the State authorities for the intervening period.¶22
Prior proceeding
The matter was directed to come up again on 10.03.2025.¶23
Prior proceeding
Pursuant to the order dated 04.02.2025, an affidavit was filed by the learned counsel for respondent No.4 stating therein that no further grievance survives in the instant appeal.¶24
Prior proceeding
Despite the above statement, no one caused appearance on behalf of the appellant in Court on the date of hearing (25.07.2025).¶25

Urmil Rani v. State of Haryana & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Urmil Rani v. State of Haryana & Ors.

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

Varinder Kumar Mahajan Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Varinder Kumar Mahajan Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Sourav Kumar Vs Union of India and Others

Poonam and Another Vs State of Haryana and Another

Union of India and Ors. Vs Ex Nk Milap Chand and Anr.

Bishamber Dass Vs Financial Commissioner and Others