Tarun Kumar v. Director Local Bodies Punjab And Others

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CWP-5235-2025 (O&M) Date of decision: 12.02.2026 Tarun Kumar ....Petitioner

Versus

Director Local Bodies, Punjab and others ....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARPREET SINGH BRAR

Present:

Mr. K.B. Raheja, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Vikas Sonak, AAG, Punjab.

Mr. R.S. Rana, Advocate for Ms. Swati Dayalan, Advocate for respondents No.3 and 4.

HARPREET SINGH BRAR J. (Oral) CM-56-CWP-2026 Prayer in the instant application filed under Section 151 of CPC is for placing on record the copy of application dated 26.08.2025 submitted by petitioner and affidavit of Biru Ram dated 03.10.2025 as Annexures P-9 and P-10, respectively.

Allowed as prayed for subject to all just exceptions. CWP-5235-2025 (O&M) 1.

Prayer in this writ petition filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, is for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari, for quashing the impugned order dated 16.12.2024 (Annexure P-5) passed by respondent No.3, whereby the application of

the petitioner for job on compassionate ground was dismissed. Further a writ of mandamus has been sought, directing the respondents to provide the job on compassionate ground to the petitioner with all benefits. 2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner, inter alia, contends that the father of the petitioner was earlier married to Shakuntla Devi and from that wedlock, the father of the petitioner had a son namely Beeru Ram and in the year 1984 Shakuntla Devi had died. Thereafter, the father of the petitioner re-married with Reena Rani and out of that wedlock, the present petition namely Tarun Kumar and one daughter Versa Rani were born. The father of petitioner and respondent No.5 was working as a Sweeper with respondent No.4 and he died in harness on 18.07.2016 and at the time of his death, respondent No.5 was married and living separately. He was also employed with Municipal Council, Dhanaula and as such, he was not dependent on his deceased father.

The petitioner approached this Court by filing CWP-4382-2024 and the said writ petition was dismissed as withdrawn on 26.02.2024 with a direction to the respondents to pass a speaking order, which was not complied with and thereafter, the petitioner was compelled to file a contempt petition i.e. COCP-4062-2024 and during the pendency of the said petition, a speaking order dated 16.12.2024 (Annexure P-5) was passed rejecting the claim of the petitioner only on the ground that he could not submit the consent of third legal heir i.e. respondent No.5 - Beeru Ram. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the petitioner has moved an application i.e.

affidavit of respondent No.5 dated 03.10.2025 and as such, the objection raised by the respondents is not tenable and thus, the grounds on which the impugned order was passed rejecting the claim of the petitioner is no longer in existence.

3.

Learned counsel for respondents No.3 and 4 submits that the claim made by the petitioner would be decided a fresh in view of the affidavit dated 03.10.2025 filed by respondent No.5 within a period of 03 months from today.

4.

In the wake of the statement made by learned counsel for respondents No.3 and 4, the respondent/competent authority is directed to consider the claim of the petitioner a fresh and pass a speaking order in view of the affidavit dated 03.10.2025 filed by respondent No.5, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, within a period of 03 months from the date of receiving a certified copy of this order. Further, the decision taken thereof shall be conveyed to the petitioner. Needless to say, if the petitioner is found entitled to the relief sought, the same shall be granted forthwith by respondent/competent authority. 5.

Disposed of, accordingly.

(HARPREET SINGH BRAR) JUDGE 12.02.2026 yakub Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether reportable:

Yes/No