Raj Kumar And Another v. State Of Haryana And Others

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARPREET SINGH BRAR Present :

Mr. Bhupinder Ghai, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Piyush Khanna, Addl. AG Haryana- State for Mr. Jagbir Malik, Advocate for respondent no.3. HARPREET SINGH BRAR , J. (Oral) he present petition has been filed under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing of transfer order dated 19.06.2025, (Annexure P-9) passed by respondent no. 2 i.e. Department of Urban Local Bodies, Haryana whereby the petitioners have been transferred to different posts governed by the service rules called as the Haryana Municipal Service Rules.

2.

Learned State counsel, at the very outset, submits that the petitioners have assailed the order dated 19.06.2025, (Annexure P-9), vide which they have been transferred from Municipal Corporation to Municipal Committee and their grievance was with regard to their posting on different posts governed by the service Rules called as Haryana Municipal Corporation Employees (Recruitment SEEMA 2026.03.25 18:46 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

and Condition of Service) Rules, 1998 (for short, '1998 Rules'). As such they have claimed that they cannot be transferred to a Municipal Committee. Learned State counsel further submits that fresh transfer orders have been passed on 18.02.2026, as per which, petitioner no. 2 -Surinder Kumar has also been transferred. Further, as far as petitioner no. 1 is concerned, an office order dated 11.03.2026 has been issued stating that petitioner no. 1 Raj Kumar is going to retire from service with effect from 31.03.2026, upon attaining the age of superannuation. His pension papers are being prepared and it would be in the interest of petitioner no. 1 only to remain at his present place of posting to facilitate proper and timely disbursal of retiral dues. He further prays that the present writ petition be disposed of as having been rendered infructuous. 3.

Learned State counsel has produced copies of orders dated 18.02.2026 and 11.03.2026, which are ordered to be taken on record as Mark 'R' and R-1' respectively. Registry is directed to tag the same at the appropriate place. In view of above, nothing survives for adjudication in the present writ petition, as the grievance raised by the petitioner stands substantially redressed. 4.

Accordingly, in view of the aforesaid submissions made by learned State counsel and without going into the merits of the controversy involved in the present petition, the same is disposed of as having been rendered infructuous, there being no surviving cause of action requiring adjudication by this Court. 5.

Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.

HARPREET SINGH BRAR Sima SEEMA 2026.03.25 18:46 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document