Sushil Kumar v. Preeti, Ias

COCP-1775-2026 (O&M)
 Sr. No.117

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH COCP-1775-2026 (O&M) Date of decision: 21st May 2026 SUSHIL KUMAR ........Petitioner versus PREETI, IAS ........Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HARPREET KAUR JEEWAN

Present:

Ms. Lipika Mamli, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Sharad Aggarwal, Addl. A.G., Haryana, for the respondent.

HARPREET KAUR JEEWAN, J. (ORAL) 1.

By way of filing the instant petition, violation of the order dated 08.10.2025 (Annexure P-1), passed by this Court in CWP-29859-2025, has been alleged, wherein, following observations have been recorded:- "xxx xxx xxx xxx 4.

Learned State counsel, on instructions from Mr. Vishwanath, SDO (Civil) Allotment Authority, Jagadhari, District Yamunanagar and Mr. Tirlok Singh, Kanoongo Surplus, submits that the aforesaid petition (Annexure P-5) filed by the petitioner would be considered and decided by respondent No.3- SDO (Civil)-cum-Allotment Authority, Yamunanagar, within a period of four months from today, after affording due opportunity of hearing to all the concerned parties and by way of passing a speaking order.

5. Keeping in view the submissions made by learned counsel for the respective parties, the present writ petition is disposed of accordingly. xxx xxx xxx xxx"

2.

Reply dated 20.05.2026, by way of an affidavit of Sh. Vishwanath, SDO, Civil-cum-Allotment Authority, Jagadhri, District SIMRANDEEP KAUR 2026.05.25 16:49 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

COCP-1775-2026 (O&M)  Yamuna Nagar, has been filed on behalf of respondent No.1, which is taken on record. Copy thereof has been supplied to the learned counsel for the petitioner.

3.

Learned counsel for the respondent submits that due to pendency of CWP-4362-2003, filed by Rishi Pal against the Financial Commissioner (Revenue) and others, wherein, the father of the petitioner namely Kali Ram is also party, the matter involves disputed and interconnected rights requiring careful consideration. It is further submitted that due to the absence of complete record, final speaking order could not be passed within the stipulated period. However, the respondent undertakes to decide the matter and pass appropriate order after obtaining the relevant record.

4.

In view of the undertaking given on behalf of the respondent, the present petition is disposed of at this stage. 5.

However, in case the matter is not decided within a period of 03 months from today, the petitioner shall be at liberty to approach this Court by way of filing a fresh petition or by way of moving an application for revival of the present petition.

6.

Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, stand disposed of. (HARPREET KAUR JEEWAN) JUDGE 21st May 2026 simran Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether reportable :

Yes/No SIMRANDEEP KAUR 2026.05.25 16:49 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document