SHIV GANGEY CONTRACTOR vs STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS — CWP/219/2023

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

Case disposed Next hearing 09-Jan-2023

CNR: PHHC011503192022

Filing Number

CWP/60559/2022

Filing Date

23-Dec-2022

Registration No

CWP/219/2023

Registration Date

06-Jan-2023

Judge

Mr. Justice Jagmohan Bansal

Coram

Mr. Justice Jagmohan Bansal

Bench Type

Single

Category

63.66 - CASE RLT TO REL OF PAY OF WRK DON UND ORD GOVT FUN ( 759 )

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.SHIV GANGEY CONTRACTOR

    Adv. RAMNISH PURI

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS

  2. 2.STATE OF HARYANA

  3. 3.COMMISSIONER MUNICIPAL CORPORATION FARIDABAD

  4. 4.DEPUTY COMMISSIONER FARIDABAD

  5. 5.ZILA PARISHAD FARIDABAD

  6. 6.DDPO FARIDABAD

  7. 7.BDPO

  8. 8.GRAM PANCHAYAT NEEMKA

  9. 9.GRAM PANCHAYAT MACHHGER

  10. 10.GRAM PANCHAYAT NEEMKA

  11. 11.GRAM PANCHAYAT MACHHGER

  12. 12.BDPO BALLABHGARH

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 13-May-2026

    Mr. Justice Jagmohan BansalView PDF

    The High Court disposed of the petition, holding that since the respondents did not dispute that the petitioner actually performed work for Gram Panchayat Neemka, the State cannot deny payment merely due to lack of documentation. The court directed the petitioner to submit evidence and invoices of work performed, and ordered the Municipal Commissioner Faridabad to examine and approve payment according to prescribed government standards if the work is verified. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 09-Jan-2023

    Other

  4. 23-Dec-2022

    Case filed

    Registration No. CWP/219/2023

casestatus.in Summary

The High Court disposed of the petition, holding that since the respondents did not dispute that the petitioner actually performed work for Gram Panchayat Neemka, the State cannot deny payment merely due to lack of documentation. The court directed the petitioner to submit evidence and invoices of work performed, and ordered the Municipal Commissioner Faridabad to examine and approve payment according to prescribed government standards if the work is verified. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case