Lehna Singh v. State Of Haryana And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CWP-21838-2017 Date of Decision : March 04, 2025 LEHNA SINGH -PETITIONER V/S STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS.

-RESPONDENTS

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP TIWARI

Present:

Mr. Raj Kapoor Malik, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Bhupender Singh, D.A.G., Haryana.

Mr. Rajesh K. Sheoran, Advocate for the respondents No.2 and 3.

Mr. Naresh Kaushik, Advocate for the respondent No.4.

*** KULDEEP TIWARI, J. (ORAL) 1.

Through the instant writ of quo warranto, prayer is made for declaring the appointment of respondent No.4 on the post of Centrifugal Mechanic in the Kaithal Cooperative Sugar Mills Limited, Kaithal, as void and illegal.

2.

On 21.01.2025, this Court had passed the hereinafter extracted order upon the instant writ:- "Learned counsel for the petitioner seeks an adjournment to address the arguments on the issue, whether, the prayer made in the instant petition, for issuing a writ of quo warranto, is maintainable, specifically, in view of a judgement passed by a coordinate bench of this Court, in "Ram Niwas vs. The Haryana State Federation of Cooperative Sugar Mills Ltd.and another and connected petition", Law Finder Doc Id # 2608876, DEVINDER YADAV 2025.03.05 09:29 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment

CWP-21838-2017 wherein, it was held that the Cooperative Sugar Mills, are not amenable for the writ petitions.

Adjourned to 04.03.2025.

To be shown in the urgent list.

It is made clear that no further request for an adjournment shall be entertained on the next date of hearing, on behalf of either of the parties."

3.

Today, the learned counsel for the petitioner fairly submits that, the objection raised by the learned counsel(s) for the contesting respondents regarding maintainability of the instant writ is valid and the post held by the respondent No.4 does not fall within the ambit of "public office".

4.

In view of the above, the instant writ is disposed of, being not maintainable. However, liberty is reserved to the petitioner to avail alternative remedy, if available under law, for redressal of his grievance, if any.

(KULDEEP TIWARI) March 04, 2025 JUDGE devinder Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether Reportable :

Yes/No DEVINDER YADAV 2025.03.05 09:29 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment