ANITA KUMARI RAKESH KUMAR vs UNION TERRITORY CHANDIGARH — CWP/14517/2026

Case under Constitution of India Section 226/227. Disposed: --DISPOSED OF on 11th May 2026.

Case disposed Next hearing 11-May-2026

CNR: PHHC010781392026

e-Filing Number

06-05-2026

Filing Number

CWP/28276/2026

Filing Date

06-May-2026

Registration No

CWP/14517/2026

Registration Date

07-May-2026

Judge

Mr. Justice Kuldeep Tiwari

Coram

Mr. Justice Kuldeep Tiwari

Category

63.3 - ALLOTMENT OF GOVT. HOUSERS ( 746 )

Judicial Branch

WRITS -I BRANCH

Decision Date

11-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

--DISPOSED OF

Last updated 01-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Constitution of India Section 226/227

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.ANITA KUMARI RAKESH KUMAR

  2. 2.Anita Kumari

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.UNION TERRITORY CHANDIGARH

  2. 2.Anita Kumari

  3. 3.The Secretary

  4. 4.State of Haryana

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 11-May-2026

    Mr. Justice Kuldeep TiwariView PDF

    Case Summary: CWP-14517-2026 Decision (11.05.2026): The High Court of Punjab and Haryana quashed the recovery notice dated 13.02.2026 ordering Anita Kumar to pay Rs. 4,33,811/- for government accommodation, finding it violated principles of natural justice. The court held that neither a show cause notice nor hearing opportunity was provided to the petitioner before issuance. The court issued a Mandamus directing the respondent to pass a fresh order after considering the petitioner's representation and affording her due hearing within six weeks. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 06-May-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. CWP/14517/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: CWP-14517-2026 Decision (11.05.2026): The High Court of Punjab and Haryana quashed the recovery notice dated 13.02.2026 ordering Anita Kumar to pay Rs. 4,33,811/- for government accommodation, finding it violated principles of natural justice. The court held that neither a show cause notice nor hearing opportunity was provided to the petitioner before issuance. The court issued a Mandamus directing the respondent to pass a fresh order after considering the petitioner's representation and affording her due hearing within six weeks. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case