L R Y LABOUR CONTRACTOR vs STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS — CWP/14193/2026

Case under Constitution of India Section 226/227. Disposed: --ALLOWED on 12th May 2026.

Case disposed Next hearing 07-May-2026

CNR: PHHC010772862026

e-Filing Number

05-05-2026

Filing Number

CWP/27931/2026

Filing Date

05-May-2026

Registration No

CWP/14193/2026

Registration Date

05-May-2026

Judge

Mr. Justice Deepak Sibal , Ms. Justice Lapita Banerji

Coram

Mr. Justice Deepak Sibal , Ms. Justice Lapita Banerji

Bench Type

Double

Judicial Branch

WRITS -I BRANCH

Decision Date

12-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

--ALLOWED

Last updated 01-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Constitution of India Section 226/227

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.L R Y LABOUR CONTRACTOR

    Adv. AKSHAY CHADHA

  2. 2.STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS

  2. 2.STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS

  3. 3.PUNJAB STATE AGRICULTURE MARKETING BOARD (PUNJAB MANDI BOARD)

  4. 4.MARKET COMMITTEE, DANA MANDI

  5. 5.HARINDER SINGH GILL

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 12-May-2026

    Mr. Justice Deepak Sibal,ms. Justice Lapita BanerjiView PDF

    The Punjab & Haryana High Court set aside a two-year blacklisting order against L.R.Y. Labour Contractor by the Ludhiana Market Committee, finding the order unsustainable due to violation of natural justice principles. The court held that blacklisting—which amounts to "civil death" of an entrepreneur—requires prior notice specifying grounds and a personal hearing before imposition, neither of which were provided here. The matter was remitted for fresh consideration following proper procedural requirements. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 05-May-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. CWP/14193/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The Punjab & Haryana High Court set aside a two-year blacklisting order against L.R.Y. Labour Contractor by the Ludhiana Market Committee, finding the order unsustainable due to violation of natural justice principles. The court held that blacklisting—which amounts to "civil death" of an entrepreneur—requires prior notice specifying grounds and a personal hearing before imposition, neither of which were provided here. The matter was remitted for fresh consideration following proper procedural requirements. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case