SUNIL AND OTHERS vs STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS — CWP/14340/2024

Disposed: --DISPOSED OF on 12th May 2026.

Case disposed Next hearing 01-Jul-2024

CNR: PHHC010747592024

Filing Number

CWP/30895/2024

Filing Date

28-May-2024

Registration No

CWP/14340/2024

Registration Date

30-May-2024

Judge

Mr. Justice Harpreet Singh Brar

Coram

Mr. Justice Harpreet Singh Brar

Bench Type

Single

Category

20.11 - SCOSB (HARYANA) ( 453 )

Judicial Branch

WRITS -I BRANCH

Decision Date

12-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

--DISPOSED OF

Last updated 01-Jun-2026

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.SUNIL AND OTHERS

    Adv. RAVINDER SINGH DHULL

  2. 2.SUNIL

  3. 3.BUNTY

  4. 4.SANJAY

  5. 5.VIPIN YADAV

  6. 6.SATBIR

  7. 7.SUMAN RANI

  8. 8.NARENDER

  9. 9.PARDEEP

  10. 10.ROHIT

  11. 11.SANDEEP

  12. 12.RAJAT KUMAR

  13. 13.YASHVEER

  14. 14.YASHU

  15. 15.MANGAL SINGH

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS

  2. 2.SUNIL

  3. 3.BUNTY

  4. 4.SANJAY

  5. 5.VIPIN YADAV

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 12-May-2026

    Mr. Justice Harpreet Singh BrarView PDF

    The High Court of Punjab and Haryana allowed CWP/14340/2024 and three related petitions challenging public notices that introduced new eligibility criteria (list of recognized institutions) after the Fire Operator-cum-Driver recruitment process was completed. The court held this mid-stream alteration of eligibility criteria violated Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution and directed respondents to reconsider petitioners' claims based solely on original advertisement criteria within six weeks, without disturbing already-made appointments. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 28-May-2024

    Case filed

    Registration No. CWP/14340/2024

casestatus.in Summary

The High Court of Punjab and Haryana allowed CWP/14340/2024 and three related petitions challenging public notices that introduced new eligibility criteria (list of recognized institutions) after the Fire Operator-cum-Driver recruitment process was completed. The court held this mid-stream alteration of eligibility criteria violated Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution and directed respondents to reconsider petitioners' claims based solely on original advertisement criteria within six weeks, without disturbing already-made appointments. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case