LPA-2004-2026 (O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH (117) CM-4862-LPA-2026 CM-4863-LPA-2026 CM-4864-LPA-2026 in/and LPA-2004-2026 Date of Decision : July 21, 2026 Panjab University and another .. Appellants Versus Rajnish Kumar and others .. Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMARINDER SINGH GREWAL Present: Mr. Indresh Goel, Advocate, for the appellants. HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI J. (ORAL) CM-4862-LPA-2026 Present application has been filed seeking condonation of delay of 32 days in filing the appeal. Keeping in view the averments made in the application, which are duly supported by an affidavit, the application is allowed. Delay of 32 days in filing the appeal is condoned. LPA-2004-2026 (O&M) 1. In the present Letter Patent Appeal, the challenge is to the order dated 07.05.2026 passed by the learned Single Judge in CWP No.18019- 2023 by which, the continuity of service being denied to respondent No.1 has been held to be bad keeping in view the exceptional circumstances of the present case. Two days delay in joining the post, has been condoned by HARSHA RANI 2026.07.24 10:31 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document LPA-2004-2026 (O&M) 2 the learned Single Judge to grant the benefit of continuity to respondent No.1, which has been challenged in the present appeal. 2. Certain facts needs to be noticed for the correct appreciation of the issue in hand. 3. Respondent No.1 was initially working as Librarian with Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan A.D. Dappar, Punjab and while working there, he applied for the post of Library Assistant in the University Institute of Legal Studies, Panjab University, Chandigarh. He was duly selected and appointed on 23.05.2013. As per the appointment order, he was to report for duty to the appellant-University within a period of 30 days. 4. At the time when he was selected, he already had 09 years, 09 months and 28 days of service with the Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan i.e. from 12.09.2013 to 10.06.2013 and in order to join the new post, respondent No.1 was relieved from service on 10.06.2013. Respondent No.1 was supposed to join on 11.06.2013 and unfortunately on the very same day, his father passed away due to which, he could not join the duty with appellant- University so as to conduct the last rites of his deceased father. Next date being a gazetted holiday on account of Martyrdom day of Guru Arjan Dev Ji, he could not join on 12.06.2013 and he ultimately joined the appellant- University on 13.06.2013. 5. On joining of the appellant-University, respondent No.1 claimed the benefit of earlier service but the same was denied that after being relieved by the Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan on 10.06.2013, there is a gap of two days before joining the University and therefore, benefit of HARSHA RANI 2026.07.24 10:31 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document LPA-2004-2026 (O&M) 3 continuity cannot be granted, which action was challenged by respondent No.1 by filing CWP No.18019 of 2023. 6. The learned Single Judge has held that though the respondent No.1 was relieved from service by the Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan on 10.06.2013 but it was under extraordinary circumstances that he could not join for two days and such non-joining in view of the prevailing circumstances, cannot take away the right to claim continuity in service and granted the said benefit to respondent No.1, which is under challenge before this Court. 7. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant- University argues that once irrespective of the fact that respondent No.1 could not join due to the circumstance mentioned but unless and until the continuity is there to join the duty with the Panjab University immediately upon being relieved from service by the previous Department, the benefit of continuity could not have been granted. 8. We have heard learned counsel for the appellants and have gone through the record with his able assistance. 9. It may be noticed that application of a Rule has to be based upon the facts and extraordinary facts, which were beyond the capability of respondent No.1, should have been considered by the Panjab University itself rather than making him to approach the competent Court of law. Further, when the learned Single Judge had already granted the said benefit, the University should have been gracious enough to consider the same rather than filing an appeal. HARSHA RANI 2026.07.24 10:31 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document LPA-2004-2026 (O&M) 4 10. Even otherwise, the continuity has to be given in case non- joining of the post immediately was beyond the control of respondent No.1. It is a conceded fact that in case respondent No.1 would have joined on 11.06.2013, the benefit of continuity in service was admissible to him. The reason for not joining on 11.06.2013 is that the father of respondent No.1 died on the same day and he had performed the last rites rather than joining the duty. The next day being a gazetted holiday, he could not join and on the next available working day, he joined. Hence, keeping in view the totality of the circumstances the non-joining for a period of one day, due to the death of the father of respondent No.1, has rightly been condoned by the learned Single Judge so as to give him the benefit of continuity of service. 11. No ground is made out for any interference by this Court in the present case as the judgment dated 07.05.2026 passed by the learned Single Judge has not been shown to be perverse either on facts or on law. 12. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. 13. Civil miscellaneous application pending if any, also stands disposed of. (HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI) JUDGE July 21, 2026 (AMARINDER SINGH GREWAL) harsha JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes Whether reportable : No HARSHA RANI 2026.07.24 10:31 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document