REETA DEVI vs STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS — CWP/14688/2026

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

Case disposed Next hearing 12-May-2026

CNR: PHHC010788722026

e-Filing Number

06-05-2026

Filing Number

CWP/28540/2026

Filing Date

07-May-2026

Registration No

CWP/14688/2026

Registration Date

08-May-2026

Judge

Mr. Justice Harsh Bunger

Coram

Mr. Justice Harsh Bunger

Category

31.2 - MUNICIPAL & PANCHAYAT LAWS ( 559 )

Judicial Branch

WRITS -I BRANCH

Decision Date

12-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

--DISPOSED OF

Last updated 01-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Constitution of India Section 226/227

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.REETA DEVI

    Adv. RAJESH TUSHAR

  2. 2.Reeta Devi

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS

  2. 2.Reeta Devi

  3. 3.The Director

  4. 4.Chief Vigilance Officer

  5. 5.Haryana State Election Commission

  6. 6.Deputy Commissioner

  7. 7.District Development and Panchayat Officer

  8. 8.Sub Divisional Magistrate (C)

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 12-May-2026

    Mr. Justice Harsh BungerView PDF

    Case Summary: Reeta Devi challenged her suspension as Acting Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat Village Sarwan Majra by the Deputy Commissioner, Karnal (dated 05.03.2026). The court disposed of the petition after the State undertook to complete the pending inquiry proceedings expeditiously within two months, affording due hearing to the petitioner. The court also directed that document requests be considered promptly. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 07-May-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. CWP/14688/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: Reeta Devi challenged her suspension as Acting Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat Village Sarwan Majra by the Deputy Commissioner, Karnal (dated 05.03.2026). The court disposed of the petition after the State undertook to complete the pending inquiry proceedings expeditiously within two months, affording due hearing to the petitioner. The court also directed that document requests be considered promptly. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case