(O&M) GURMAIL SINGH HARINDER SHARMA, M.K.GARG vs P.S.E.B. ETC — RSA/868/1997

Case under No Acts Defined. Disposed: Contested--DISMISSED on 14th May 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: PHHC010413621997

Filing Number

RSA/868/1997

Filing Date

21-Mar-1997

Registration No

RSA/868/1997

Registration Date

21-Mar-1997

Judge

Mrs. Justice Sudeepti Sharma

Coram

Mrs. Justice Sudeepti Sharma

Bench Type

Single

Category

26.1 - RSA SERVICE ( 497 )

Sub-Category

( 944 )

Judicial Branch

CIVIL II(RSA) BRANCH

Decision Date

14-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISMISSED

Last updated 01-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

No Acts Defined

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.(O&M) GURMAIL SINGH HARINDER SHARMA, M.K.GARG

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.P.S.E.B. ETC

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 14-May-2026

    Mrs. Justice Sudeepti SharmaView PDF

    Summary: The High Court of Punjab & Haryana dismissed Gurmail Singh's second appeal challenging his delayed regularization as a Bill Distributor with Punjab State Electricity Board (PSEB). Singh worked ad hoc since May 1988 but was only regularized in February 1996, though policy allowed regularization after two years if a regular vacancy existed. The court upheld lower courts' dismissals, finding Singh failed to prove any regular post/vacancy was available in his Moga division for regularization and that he wasn't recruited through employment exchange or open advertisement as required by policy. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 21-Mar-1997

    Case filed

    Registration No. RSA/868/1997

casestatus.in Summary

Summary: The High Court of Punjab & Haryana dismissed Gurmail Singh's second appeal challenging his delayed regularization as a Bill Distributor with Punjab State Electricity Board (PSEB). Singh worked ad hoc since May 1988 but was only regularized in February 1996, though policy allowed regularization after two years if a regular vacancy existed. The court upheld lower courts' dismissals, finding Singh failed to prove any regular post/vacancy was available in his Moga division for regularization and that he wasn't recruited through employment exchange or open advertisement as required by policy. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case