Daljeet Kaur v. State Of Punjab And Others

109 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No. 33569 of 2025 Date of Decision:20.11.2025 Daljeet Kaur ....Petitioner vs.

State of Punjab and others ....Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGMOHAN BANSAL

Present:

Mr. Kapil Kakkar, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. Aman Dhir, DAG, Punjab *** JAGMOHAN BANSAL, J. (ORAL) 1.

On 12.11.2025, the following order was passed by this Court:- "

The petitioner through instant petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India is seeking setting aside of order dated 22.01.2021 whereby she was dismissed from service and order dated 11.09.2025 whereby Appellate Authority has dismissed her appeal. The petitioner joined Punjab Police as Typist (Clerk) on 02.04.1998. She was promoted as Junior Assistant in January' 2011. She was further promoted as Senior Assistant in May' 2017. She applied for 90 days Child Care Leave on 04.08.2017 which was duly sanctioned. She applied for extension of said leave upto 29.06.2018 which was also sanctioned by competent authority. She submitted application dated 25.06.2018 seeking voluntary retirement w.e.f. 29.06.2018. She undertook to deposit three months' salary in lieu of PARAMJIT KAUR SAINI 2025.11.20 04:30 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CWP No. 33569 of 2025 -2advance notice. The respondent issued her chargesheet for absence from duty since 02.07.2018. The respondent vide order dated 22.01.2021 dismissed her from service. She preferred appeal before Government which came to be dismissed vide order dated 11.09.2025.

Learned State counsel submits that petitioner did not raise issue of voluntary retirement before authorities. There is possibility that she did not actually file said application. He seeks time to verify status of alleged application seeking voluntary retirement.

Adjourned to 20.11.2025."

2.

Learned State counsel submits that application of the petitioner was rejected vide order dated 03.08.2018. The petitioner was attempted to be served many notices/orders, however, she could not be served because she was out of country.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that order rejecting application seeking Voluntary Retirement was never communicated to her. In the absence of communication, there was no reason to assail said order. 4.

On the asking of Court, Mr. Aman Dhir, DAG, Punjab submits that copy of the order along with all relevant documents would be supplied to counsel for the petitioner during the course of day. 5.

Faced with this, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw the instant petition with liberty to file afresh with better particulars.

6.

Dismissed as withdrawn with aforesaid liberty. (JAGMOHAN BANSAL) JUDGE 20.11.2025 paramjit Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes Whether reportable:

No PARAMJIT KAUR SAINI 2025.11.20 04:30 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document