EX HEAD CONSTABLE LUBHAYA MASIH vs STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS — CWP/11362/2026
Case under Constitution of India Section 226/227. Disposed: --DISMISSED on 14th May 2026.
CNR: PHHC010606392026
e-Filing Number
08-04-2026
Filing Number
CWP/21592/2026
Filing Date
09-Apr-2026
Registration No
CWP/11362/2026
Registration Date
10-Apr-2026
Judge
Mr. Justice Deepinder Singh Nalwa
Coram
Mr. Justice Deepinder Singh Nalwa
Bench Type
Single
Category
68.21 - SERVICE-PUNJAB POLICE ( 779 )
Judicial Branch
WRITS -I BRANCH
Decision Date
14-May-2026
Nature of Disposal
--DISMISSED
Last updated 01-Jun-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.EX HEAD CONSTABLE LUBHAYA MASIH
Adv. R.K.ARYA
-
2.State of Punjab through its Chief Secretary
Respondent(s)
-
1.STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS
-
2.State of Punjab through its Chief Secretary
-
3.The Director General of Police
-
4.The Inspector General of Police
-
5.Deputy Inspector General of Police
-
6.The Senior Superintendent of Police Gurdaspur
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
14-May-2026
Mr. Justice Deepinder Singh NalwaView PDF
Case Summary: CWP/11362/2026 The High Court of Punjab and Haryana dismissed Ex Head Constable Lubhaya Masih's writ petition challenging his 2014 dismissal from Punjab Police on grounds of inordinate delay and laches. Although the petitioner claimed the dismissal order failed to consider his length of service as required by Rule 16.2 of the Punjab Police Rules, 1934, the court declined to examine the merits, finding that filing the petition after approximately 12 years without satisfactory explanation violated the doctrine of delay. The court applied Supreme Court precedent holding that discretionary writ jurisdiction should not ordinarily assist those who approach courts tardily and without explanation for unreasonable delay. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
09-Apr-2026
Case filed
Registration No. CWP/11362/2026
Case Summary: CWP/11362/2026 The High Court of Punjab and Haryana dismissed Ex Head Constable Lubhaya Masih's writ petition challenging his 2014 dismissal from Punjab Police on grounds of inordinate delay and laches. Although the petitioner claimed the dismissal order failed to consider his length of service as required by Rule 16.2 of the Punjab Police Rules, 1934, the court declined to examine the merits, finding that filing the petition after approximately 12 years without satisfactory explanation violated the doctrine of delay. The court applied Supreme Court precedent holding that discretionary writ jurisdiction should not ordinarily assist those who approach courts tardily and without explanation for unreasonable delay. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts