IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH 118 CWP-29645-2026 Date of Decision: 11.09.2026 TAKHAT SINGH ... Petitioner VERSUS STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS ... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMAN CHAUDHARY. **** Present: Mr. Aman Dhir, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Udit Garg, Addl. A.G., Haryana. **** AMAN CHAUDHARY, J. (ORAL) 1. Learned counsel submits that the petitioner was dismissed from service vide impugned order dated 30.04.2024, Annexure P-2, against which appeal was also dismissed, however, subsequently he was acquitted in the criminal case bearing FIR No.12 dated 10.01.2023 vide judgment dated 10.05.2025, Annexure P-5 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Gurugram and as per Rule 16.3 of the Punjab Civil Service Rules, the matter needs to be reconsidered. The mercy appeal filed by him is also pending. He further submits that vide Annexure P-7, the Addl. Chief Secretary to Government of Haryana, Home Department has written to the Director General of Police, Haryana to reconsider the claim of the petitioner in light of the above. He further relies on the judgment dated 28.02.2024 passed by a Coordinate Bench in CWP-4591 of 2024 titled as ‘Tarsem Chand Vs. State of Punjab and Others’. He thus prays that his claim may be directed to be reconsidered and decided by the Appellate Authority in view of the above in a time-bound manner. RAJENDER KUMAR 2026.09.11 15:15 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CWP-29645-2026 -2- 2. The aforesaid facts having been brought out during the course of hearing, learned State counsel, on instructions, states that the Appellate Authority would not be averse to having a relook at the matter and decide the same afresh within four months in accordance with law taking note of the submissions made and judgment referred to hereinabove as also Annexure P-7 and after granting an opportunity of hearing to him, which this Court has no reason to believe the authorities would not address in a just, fair and reasonable manner. 3. The matter stands disposed of accordingly and if the petitioner is found entitled, grant the benefit forthwith. Needless to say, if the orders are adverse to his interest, the same shall contain reasons and he shall be free to seek legal redress thereupon. (AMAN CHAUDHARY) SEPTEMBER 11, 2026. JUDGE Rajender Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No RAJENDER KUMAR 2026.09.11 15:15 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH 118 CWP-29645-2026 Date of Decision: 11.09.2026 TAKHAT SINGH ... Petitioner VERSUS STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS ... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMAN CHAUDHARY. **** Present: Mr. Aman Dhir, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Udit Garg, Addl. A.G., Haryana. **** AMAN CHAUDHARY, J. (ORAL) 1. Learned counsel submits that the petitioner was dismissed from service vide impugned order dated 30.04.2024, Annexure P-2, against which appeal was also dismissed, however, subsequently he was acquitted in the criminal case bearing FIR No.12 dated 10.01.2023 vide judgment dated 10.05.2025, Annexure P-5 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Gurugram and as per Rule 16.3 of the Punjab Civil Service Rules, the matter needs to be reconsidered. The mercy appeal filed by him is also pending. He further submits that vide Annexure P-7, the Addl. Chief Secretary to Government of Haryana, Home Department has written to the Director General of Police, Haryana to reconsider the claim of the petitioner in light of the above. He further relies on the judgment dated 28.02.2024 passed by a Coordinate Bench in CWP-4591 of 2024 titled as ‘Tarsem Chand Vs. State of Punjab and Others’. He thus prays that his claim may be directed to be reconsidered and decided by the Appellate Authority in view of the above in a time-bound manner. RAJENDER KUMAR 2026.09.11 15:15 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CWP-29645-2026 -2- 2. The aforesaid facts having been brought out during the course of hearing, learned State counsel, on instructions, states that the Appellate Authority would not be averse to having a relook at the matter and decide the same afresh within four months in accordance with law taking note of the submissions made and judgment referred to hereinabove as also Annexure P-7 and after granting an opportunity of hearing to him, which this Court has no reason to believe the authorities would not address in a just, fair and reasonable manner. 3. The matter stands disposed of accordingly and if the petitioner is found entitled, grant the benefit forthwith. Needless to say, if the orders are adverse to his interest, the same shall contain reasons and he shall be free to seek legal redress thereupon. (AMAN CHAUDHARY) SEPTEMBER 11, 2026. JUDGE Rajender Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No RAJENDER KUMAR 2026.09.11 15:15 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document