Jaswinder Singh v. State Of Haryana And Others

CWP-4160-2020

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CWP-4160-2020 Date of decision:12.03.2026 Jaswinder Singh .....Petitioner

VERSUS

State of Haryana and others .....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARPREET SINGH BRAR Present :

Mr. Abhishek K. Premi with Mr.Sahil Sehrawat, Advocates for the petitioner.

Mr. Piyush Khanna, Addl. AG Haryana-State.

Mr. Vishal Garg, Advocate for respondents No.2 and 3 (through V.C.).

Mr. Aditya Gautam, Advocate for respondent No.4. HARPREET SINGH BRAR, J. (Oral) 1.

The present petition has been filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the impugned advertisement dated 07.12.2017 (Annexure P-5) issued by respondent No.4 whereby the posts of SubDivisional Engineer (Electrical), Class-III were advertised despite the fact that as per Haryana State Agricultural Marketing Board Services Rules, 2008 only 2 posts are earmarked for direct recruitment being illegal arbitrary and contrary to the provisions of Haryana State Agricultural Marketing Board Services Rules, 2008. Further praying for issuance of a writ in the PUNEET CHAWLA 2026.03.13 15:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CWP-4160-2020 nature of mandamus directing the respondents to fill up the 2 posts of SubDivisional Engineer (Electrical) under director recruitment as prescribed under the Haryana State Agricultural Marketing Board Services Rules, 2008 and further for directing the respondents to fill up the remaining one post of Sub-Divisional Engineer (Electrical) by way of promotion amongst the degree holder candidates. Further during the pendency of the present writ petition the appointment beyond -2 posts of Sub-Divisional Engineer (Electrical) be stayed in terms of interim order dated 20.09.2018 (Annexure P-7) passed by this Court in CWP-11312-2018, titles as Vijay Kumar and others Versus State of Haryana and others.

2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner, at the very outset, submits that nothing survives for adjudication in the present petition. He, therefore, prays that the present writ petition be disposed of as having been rendered infructuous.

3.

In view of the aforesaid submission made by learned counsel for the petitioner, the present writ petition is disposed of as having been rendered infructuous, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any.

(HARPREET SINGH BRAR) JUDGE March 12, 2026 P.C Whether speaking/reasoned. : Yes/No Whether Reportable. :

Yes/No PUNEET CHAWLA 2026.03.13 15:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document