MANOJ KUMAR vs STATE OF HARYANA AND ANOTHER Advocate - A.G. HARYANA — CWP/26937/2021

Case under Constitution of India Section 1. Disposed: --DISPOSED OF on 13th May 2026.

Case disposed Next hearing 05-Jan-2022

CNR: PHHC011228172021

Filing Number

CWP/73731/2021

Filing Date

22-Dec-2021

Registration No

CWP/26937/2021

Registration Date

23-Dec-2021

Judge

Mr. Justice Kuldeep Tiwari

Coram

Mr. Justice Kuldeep Tiwari

Bench Type

Single

Category

84.2 - CASES FILED BY EMPLOYEES OF DISTT. COURT OF HY. ( 818 )

Sub-Category

( 944 )

Judicial Branch

WRITS -I BRANCH

Decision Date

13-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

--DISPOSED OF

Last updated 01-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Constitution of India Section 1

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.MANOJ KUMAR

    Adv. VIKRAM SHEORAN

Respondent(s)

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

  2. 2.DISTRICT AND SESSION JUDGE ROHTAK

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 13-May-2026

    Mr. Justice Kuldeep TiwariView PDF

    The High Court of Punjab and Haryana set aside an October 2021 order by which the District Court, Rohtak, withdrew benefits from petitioner Manoj Kumar and directed him to refund Rs. 99,668. The court found the order violated principles of natural justice as no show cause notice or hearing opportunity was afforded to the petitioner before passing it. The respondent fairly conceded this procedural lapse. The court reserved liberty to respondent no.2 to issue a fresh show cause notice and afford due hearing before taking any final decision. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 05-Jan-2022

    Other

  4. 22-Dec-2021

    Case filed

    Registration No. CWP/26937/2021

casestatus.in Summary

The High Court of Punjab and Haryana set aside an October 2021 order by which the District Court, Rohtak, withdrew benefits from petitioner Manoj Kumar and directed him to refund Rs. 99,668. The court found the order violated principles of natural justice as no show cause notice or hearing opportunity was afforded to the petitioner before passing it. The respondent fairly conceded this procedural lapse. The court reserved liberty to respondent no.2 to issue a fresh show cause notice and afford due hearing before taking any final decision. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case