Inder Singh v. State Of Haryana And Others

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH **** CWP-3945-2001 Date of Decision:29.09.2025 INDER SINGH

...Petitioner

Vs.

STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS.

...Respondents

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGMOHAN BANSAL Present:- None for the petitioner Mr. Ravi Partap Singh, DAG Haryana *** JAGMOHAN BANSAL, J. (ORAL) 1.

The petitioner is seeking setting aside of order of compulsory retirement.

2.

The petitioner in 1999 was holding post of ASI. The DGP sought permission from Government to compulsorily retire petitioner in terms of Rule 9.18(2) of Punjab Police Rules, 1934 (as applicable to State of Haryana). The respondent issued show cause notice dated 12.07.1999 proposing petitioner's compulsory retirement. He was actually retired in January' 2001.

3.

There is no representation on behalf of the petitioner. 4.

The instant petition deserves to be disposed of considering the efflux of time, factum that petitioner must have been receiving pension since 2001 which is 50% of last pay drawn. DEEPAK BISSYAN 2025.09.30 15:41 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CWP-3945-2001 -25.

Disposed of with liberty to petitioner to move an appropriate application within three months from today, if cause survives. 6.

Pending application(s), if any, stands disposed of. (JAGMOHAN BANSAL) JUDGE September 29, 2025 Deepak DPA Whether Speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No DEEPAK BISSYAN 2025.09.30 15:41 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document