SANGEETA vs PUNJAB STATE POWER CORPORATION LIMITED — CWP/15121/2026

Case under Constitution of India Section Article 226. Disposed: --DISPOSED OF on 15th May 2026.

Case disposed Next hearing 15-May-2026

CNR: PHHC010822072026

e-Filing Number

12-05-2026

Filing Number

CWP/29864/2026

Filing Date

12-May-2026

Registration No

CWP/15121/2026

Registration Date

13-May-2026

Judge

Mr. Justice Harpreet Singh Brar

Coram

Mr. Justice Harpreet Singh Brar

Category

20.4 - SC OSB (PUNJAB) ( 466 )

Judicial Branch

WRITS -I BRANCH

Decision Date

15-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

--DISPOSED OF

Last updated 01-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Constitution of India Section Article 226

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.SANGEETA

    Adv. HARVINDER PAL SINGH GHUMAN

  2. 2.Sangeeta

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.PUNJAB STATE POWER CORPORATION LIMITED

  2. 2.Sangeeta

  3. 3.Chief engineer

  4. 4.additional Superintending Engineerr

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 15-May-2026

    Mr. Justice Harpreet Singh BrarView PDF

    The High Court of Punjab and Haryana disposed of the petition without deciding the merits, instead directing Punjab State Power Corporation Limited to hear and decide the petitioner's legal notice dated 19.04.2026 within three months by passing a reasoned order. The petitioner had challenged a 2022 order treating a non-posting period (July 1999–October 2000) as leave and adjusting it against earned leave, resulting in salary denial, but agreed to settle for administrative reconsideration rather than pursue full relief. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 12-May-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. CWP/15121/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The High Court of Punjab and Haryana disposed of the petition without deciding the merits, instead directing Punjab State Power Corporation Limited to hear and decide the petitioner's legal notice dated 19.04.2026 within three months by passing a reasoned order. The petitioner had challenged a 2022 order treating a non-posting period (July 1999–October 2000) as leave and adjusting it against earned leave, resulting in salary denial, but agreed to settle for administrative reconsideration rather than pursue full relief. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case