Can a Writ Court Relax Rules for Compassionate Appointment ex debito justitiae? — Reaffirmation of Jurisdictional Limits

Punjab & Haryana High Court dismisses writ petition seeking relaxation of policy/rules for compassionate appointment, reiterates that withdrawal of such petition with liberty does not amount to adjudication on merits. The decision upholds established precedent, reinforcing limits on issuance of extraordinary writs for relaxing recruitment rules in service matters.

 

Summary

Category Data
Case Name CWP/30713/2025 of HARDEEP KAUR Vs STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS
CNR PHHC011673272025
Date of Registration 14-10-2025
Decision Date 30-10-2025
Disposal Nature DISMISSED
Judgment Author MR. JUSTICE HARPREET SINGH BRAR
Court High Court of Punjab and Haryana
Precedent Value No adjudication on merits; procedural value for withdrawal and liberty
Type of Law Service Law / Writ Jurisdiction
Questions of Law Whether the writ court can relax rules/policy for compassionate appointment ex debito justitiae.
Facts as Summarised by the Court
  • Petitioner sought direction for compassionate appointment by relaxing applicable rules/policy.
  • During hearing, counsel sought to withdraw the petition with liberty to file afresh with better particulars.
  • Petition accordingly dismissed as withdrawn with liberty.

Practical Impact

Category Impact
Binding On Not applicable; no adjudication on merits.
Persuasive For Only of procedural value regarding withdrawal and liberty.

What’s New / What Lawyers Should Note

  • The High Court reaffirmed that withdrawal of a writ petition with liberty does not result in adjudication on merits.
  • If essential particulars are missing, a petitioner may seek withdrawal with liberty to refile; courts may permit.
  • No legal principle determined regarding relaxation of rules for compassionate appointment in this decision.

Summary of Legal Reasoning

  • The matter was not adjudicated on merits as the petitioner’s counsel sought withdrawal of the petition with liberty to file afresh with better particulars.
  • The writ was dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as requested.
  • No substantive discussion or determination occurred regarding the powers of a writ court to relax service rules or policy for compassionate appointments.

Arguments by the Parties

Petitioner

  • Sought issuance of writ for compassionate appointment by relaxing relevant rules/policy.
  • Requested direction for consideration of representation dated 19.09.2023.
  • During hearing, requested withdrawal of petition with liberty to file again with better details.

Respondent

  • No submissions recorded in the order.

Factual Background

The petitioner filed a civil writ petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution seeking compassionate appointment in relaxation of the relevant rules/policy and a direction to decide her pending representation dated 19.09.2023. At the hearing, the petitioner’s counsel sought permission to withdraw the petition with liberty to refile, citing the need to provide better particulars. The court permitted withdrawal with liberty accordingly.

Statutory Analysis

  • The petition invoked Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, seeking the extraordinary writ jurisdiction of the High Court.
  • No statutory provision was interpreted or discussed substantively in the order.

Procedural Innovations

  • The Court permitted withdrawal of the petition with explicit liberty to refile on the same cause of action with better particulars.

Alert Indicators

  • ✔ Precedent Followed – Court adhered to established practice allowing withdrawal of the writ with liberty, without proceeding to adjudication on merits.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Recent Comments

No comments to show.