← Library
High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCWP/26805/2025disposed of

Dharam Pal v. State Of Haryana And Others

2025-09-10Mr. Justice Harpreet Singh Brar3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CWP-26805-2025 (O&M) Date of decision: 10.09.2025 Dharam Pal ....Petitioner

Versus

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

Present:

Mr. Abhinav, Advocate and Mr. Madan Pal, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Piyush Khanna, Addl. A.G., Haryana for respondent No.1.

Mr. Vikrant Pamboo, Advocate for respondents No.2 to 5.

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 certiorari, for quashing the impugned order dated 25.02.1991 (Annexure P-7) passed by respondent No.4 and impugned order dated 30.06.2025 (Annexure P-11) passed by respondent No.3 vide which claim of the petitioner has been rejected. Further a writ of mandamus has been sought, directing the respondents to release the entire four increments which has been withheld vide order date 25.09.1991 (Annexure P-7) and thereafter release all consequential benefit including retrial benefit to the petitioner along with 18% interest per

annum. In alternative, it has been prayed that respondent No.2 be directed to take decision on the revision petition dated 14.07.2025 (Annexure P-13) within specific period in view of the judgments (Annexure P-14 to P-18).

2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner, at this stage, confines his prayer to the extent that a direction be issued to respondent No.2 to decide the revision petition dated 14.07.2025 (Annexure P-13) of the petitioner in a time bound manner.

3.

Learned State counsel as well as learned counsel for respondents No.2 to 5, appearing on advance notice, submits that they have no objection, in case a direction is issued to respondent No.2 for time-bound consideration and decision of the revision petition dated 14.07.2025 (Annexure P-13) of the petitioner. 4.

Therefore, in view of the limited prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner, respondent No.2 is directed to decide the revision petition dated 14.07.2025 (Annexure P-13) of the petitioner and pass a reasoned and speaking order, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. Respondent No.2 shall consider all specific grounds raised by the petitioner and deal with the same while assigning reasons for the conclusions arrived at. 5.

It is well settled that assigning reasons is an essential facet of natural justice and a requirement of fair adjudication. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of Orissa v. Dhani Ram, 2004 (5) SCC 568,

emphasized that "reason is the heartbeat of every conclusion, and without the same, it becomes lifeless." A failure to record reasons amounts to denial of justice and makes the order vulnerable to judicial review. Therefore, the speaking order shall clearly reflect the application of mind to the issues raised and disclose the rationale for the decision taken. The decision so taken shall be duly communicated to the petitioner forthwith.

6.

Disposed of, accordingly.

(HARPREET SINGH BRAR) JUDGE 10.09.2025 yakub Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether reportable:

Yes/No