JITENDER KUMAR vs STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS Advocate - A.G. HARYANA — CWP/20107/2022

Case under Constitution of India Section 1. Disposed: --DISMISSED on 15th May 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: PHHC010974262022

Filing Number

CWP/39005/2022

Filing Date

31-Aug-2022

Registration No

CWP/20107/2022

Registration Date

05-Sep-2022

Judge

Mr. Justice Harpreet Singh Brar

Coram

Mr. Justice Harpreet Singh Brar

Bench Type

Single

Category

20.11 - SCOSB (HARYANA) ( 453 )

Sub-Category

( 944 )

Judicial Branch

WRITS -I BRANCH

Decision Date

15-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

--DISMISSED

Last updated 01-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Constitution of India Section 1

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.JITENDER KUMAR

    Adv. ROHIT NAGPAL

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS Advocate - A.G. HARYANA

  2. 2.DIRECTOR URBAN LOCAL BODIES

  3. 3.DISTRICT MUNICIPAL COMMISSIONER

  4. 4.DEPUTY COMMISSIONER HISAR

  5. 5.JOINT COMMISSIONER

  6. 6.MUNICIPAL COUNCIL HANSI

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 15-May-2026

    Mr. Justice Harpreet Singh BrarView PDF

    The High Court of Punjab and Haryana dismissed Jitender Kumar's petition challenging his termination as a contractual Junior Engineer with the Municipal Council, Hansi. The court held that as a contractual employee, Kumar was not entitled to full protection of regular service rules and that providing a show cause notice and associating him with inquiry proceedings satisfied natural justice requirements, with no statutory mandate violation demonstrated. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 31-Aug-2022

    Case filed

    Registration No. CWP/20107/2022

casestatus.in Summary

The High Court of Punjab and Haryana dismissed Jitender Kumar's petition challenging his termination as a contractual Junior Engineer with the Municipal Council, Hansi. The court held that as a contractual employee, Kumar was not entitled to full protection of regular service rules and that providing a show cause notice and associating him with inquiry proceedings satisfied natural justice requirements, with no statutory mandate violation demonstrated. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case