Praveen Kumar v. State Of Haryana And Others

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CWP-18902-2026 (O&M) Date of decision: 01.07.2026 Praveen Kumar ....Petitioner

Versus

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

Present:

Mr. Rakesh Nehra, Sr. Advocate with Ms. Bindu Tanwar, Advocate Mr. Harmanpreet Kaur, Advocate Ms. Nitika Malik, Advocate and Ms. Sandhya Saini, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Harish Nain, DAG, Haryana.

HARPREET SINGH BRAR J. (Oral) 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 mandamus, directing the official respondents to register an F.I.R. against respondent No.2, 3 and 4 in accordance with law and further issue directions for the constitution of a Special Investigation Team (SIT) or any other independent agency to conduct a fair, impartial and timebound investigation into the matter. Further prayer has been made to direct respondent No.1 to send guidelines to the petitioner's present office according to RPWD Act so that DIVYANG petitioner may perform his duty with dignity and to initiate disciplinary proceedings against respondents No.2 to 4 for their illegal acts, abuse of authority,

and harassment caused to the petitioner and further direct the respondents to provide adequate compensation to the petitioner for the mental agony, harassment and violation of fundamental and statutory rights. Another prayer has been made to issue necessary directions to ensure protection and safety of the petitioner from respondent No.4 and any further acts of harassment, intimidation or atrocities and to issue directions to initiate appropriate criminal proceedings under Section 92 of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 against the erring respondents for the acts committed against the petitioner. 2.

Learned Senior counsel for the petitioner, at the outset, submits that he does not press the first prayer seeking directions to the official respondents to register an FIR against respondents No.2 to 4 and for constitution of a Special Investigation Team (SIT) or any other independent agency to conduct a fair, impartial and time-bound investigation into the matter. He, however, prays that liberty be granted to the petitioner to avail the alternative remedy in accordance with law. 3.

The said prayer is dismissed as not pressed and liberty is granted to the petitioner to avail the alternative remedy as may be available to him in accordance with law.

4.

Learned Senior counsel for the petitioner submits that he would be satisfied if the representation dated NIL (Annexure P-8) of the petitioner is considered and decided by the Disability Commissioner, functioning under the office of the State Commissioner for Persons with

Disabilities, Old Antyodaya Bhawan, Panchkula, by passing a speaking order in a time bound manner.

5.

Learned State counsel, appearing on advance notice, submits that he has no objection, in case a direction is issued to the Disability Commissioner concerned for time-bound consideration and decision of the representation dated NIL (Annexure P-8) of the petitioner by passing a speaking order.

6.

Therefore, in view of the limited prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner, the Disability Commissioner, Panchkula is directed to consider the representation dated NIL (Annexure P-8) of the petitioner and pass a speaking order, 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 Disability Commissioner.

7.

Disposed of, accordingly.

(HARPREET SINGH BRAR) JUDGE 01.07.2026 yakub Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether reportable:

Yes/No