BHAGI RATH vs STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS — CWP/11914/2026

Case under Constitution of India Section 226. Disposed: --DISPOSED OF on 21st April 2026.

Case disposed Next hearing 21-Apr-2026

CNR: PHHC010569922026

e-Filing Number

02-04-2026

Filing Number

CWP/20164/2026

Filing Date

04-Apr-2026

Registration No

CWP/11914/2026

Registration Date

18-Apr-2026

Judge

Mr. Justice Deepinder Singh Nalwa

Coram

Mr. Justice Deepinder Singh Nalwa

Category

58.21 - SERVICE-HARYANA POLICE ( 713 )

Judicial Branch

WRITS -I BRANCH

Decision Date

21-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

--DISPOSED OF

Last updated 28-May-2026

Acts & Sections

Constitution of India Section 226

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.BHAGI RATH

    Adv. ADITYA YADAV

  2. 2.State of Haryana and others

  3. 3.Bhagi Rath

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS

  2. 2.State of Haryana and others

  3. 3.Bhagi Rath

  4. 4.The Inspector General of Police

  5. 5.The Superintendent of Police

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 21-Apr-2026

    Mr. Justice Deepinder Singh NalwaView PDF

    Case Summary: CWP/11914/2026 Bhagi Rath challenged a compulsory retirement order issued at age 55 by the State of Haryana. The petitioner sought a direction to decide his pending representation against the retirement order within a time-bound manner. The court disposed of the petition by directing the competent authority to consider and decide the representation within 10 days in accordance with law, without commenting on the merits. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 04-Apr-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. CWP/11914/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: CWP/11914/2026 Bhagi Rath challenged a compulsory retirement order issued at age 55 by the State of Haryana. The petitioner sought a direction to decide his pending representation against the retirement order within a time-bound manner. The court disposed of the petition by directing the competent authority to consider and decide the representation within 10 days in accordance with law, without commenting on the merits. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case