MOHAN RATURI AND ORS vs UNION OF INDIA AND ORS Advocate - Satya Pal Jain (Sr. Adv.) — CWP/8053/2021
Case under Constitution of India Section 1. Disposed: --DISMISSED on 11th May 2026.
CNR: PHHC010315702021
Filing Number
CWP/12272/2021
Filing Date
24-Mar-2021
Registration No
CWP/8053/2021
Registration Date
07-Apr-2021
Judge
Mr. Justice Sandeep Moudgil
Coram
Mr. Justice Sandeep Moudgil
Bench Type
Single
Category
94.2 - GOVT. SERVICE UOI ( 826 )
Sub-Category
( 944 )
Judicial Branch
WRITS -I BRANCH
Decision Date
11-May-2026
Nature of Disposal
--DISMISSED
Last updated 01-Jun-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.MOHAN RATURI AND ORS
Adv. PAWAN K. SHARMA
-
2.YASHWANT KUMAR SINGH
-
3.RAMENDERA SINGH YADAV
-
4.CHANDRA BHAN YADAV
-
5.ANKESH PANDEY
-
6.SUNIL CHOBE
-
7.MAHAVIR SINGH
-
8.JITENDER SINGH
-
9.PRAVIN KUMAR ARYA
-
10.RATTAN MEENA
-
11.SATISH
-
12.ABHIMANYU SINGH
-
13.PANKAJ KUMAR
-
14.SAILENDRA YADAV
-
15.BASANT JOSHI
-
16.ANIL SINGH PANWAR
-
17.SUKHDEV SHARMA
-
18.VIJAY KUMAR DAS
-
19.ANAND KUMAR
-
20.ASHOK KUMAR
-
21.BHUPINDER SINGH
-
22.PAWAN CHAND
-
23.SITARAM YADAV
-
24.PRAHALAD RAM
-
25.SURENDER SINGH
Respondent(s)
-
1.UNION OF INDIA AND ORS Advocate - Satya Pal Jain (Sr. Adv.)
-
2.THE SAO DTE. FEN.
-
3.THE INSPECTOR GENERAL
-
4.THE DIG
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
11-May-2026
Mr. Justice Sandeep MoudgilView PDF
The Punjab and Haryana High Court dismissed the writ petition for non-prosecution on 11.05.2026. The petitioners challenged the final selection list for Sub-Inspector/General Duty positions, alleging malpractice, favoritism, and violations of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution. However, since no counsel appeared for the petitioners on multiple hearing dates despite prior notice, the court inferred lack of interest in pursuing the matter and dismissed the petition. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
08-Apr-2021
Other
-
24-Mar-2021
Case filed
Registration No. CWP/8053/2021
The Punjab and Haryana High Court dismissed the writ petition for non-prosecution on 11.05.2026. The petitioners challenged the final selection list for Sub-Inspector/General Duty positions, alleging malpractice, favoritism, and violations of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution. However, since no counsel appeared for the petitioners on multiple hearing dates despite prior notice, the court inferred lack of interest in pursuing the matter and dismissed the petition. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts