HARJEET SINGH vs HARYANA VIDYUT PRASARAN NIGAM LIMITED — CWP/11820/2026
Case under Constitution of India Section 226/227. Disposed: --DISMISSED on 21st April 2026.
CNR: PHHC010645652026
Next Hearing
21st April 2026
e-Filing Number
17-04-2026
Filing Number
CWP/22960/2026
Filing Date
17-04-2026
Registration No
CWP/11820/2026
Registration Date
18-04-2026
Judge
MR. JUSTICE HARPREET SINGH BRAR
Coram
MR. JUSTICE HARPREET SINGH BRAR
Category
20.11 - SCOSB (HARYANA) ( 453 )
Judicial Branch
WRITS -I BRANCH
Decision Date
21st April 2026
Nature of Disposal
--DISMISSED
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
HARJEET SINGH
Adv. RAVI SHARMA
Haryana Vidyut Prasaran Nigam Limited
Respondent(s)
HARYANA VIDYUT PRASARAN NIGAM LIMITED
Haryana Vidyut Prasaran Nigam Limited
Executive Engineer, Division (TS), Haryana
Orders
Case Summary: CWP/11820/2026 The High Court of Punjab and Haryana dismissed Harjeet Singh's petition seeking regularization of his contractual employment as a Shift Attendant with Haryana Vidyut Prasaran Nigam Limited. The court held that since Singh was engaged on a contractual basis, did not seek regularization during his service tenure, and filed the petition only after his retirement on 31.12.2024 (nine months later), the employer-employee relationship had terminated and no legal right to claim regularization survived. The court found the issue settled by prior precedent and rejected his claims based on delay and lack of standing post-retirement. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: CWP/11820/2026 The High Court of Punjab and Haryana dismissed Harjeet Singh's petition seeking regularization of his contractual employment as a Shift Attendant with Haryana Vidyut Prasaran Nigam Limited. The court held that since Singh was engaged on a contractual basis, did not seek regularization during his service tenure, and filed the petition only after his retirement on 31.12.2024 (nine months later), the employer-employee relationship had terminated and no legal right to claim regularization survived. The court found the issue settled by prior precedent and rejected his claims based on delay and lack of standing post-retirement. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts