Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Punjab and Haryana · body

2008 DAILYLAW 2325 (PNJ)

VINAY KUMAR AND ORS v. STATE OF HARYANA AND ANR

CWP/2791/2020 · 2026-07-09

Nidhi Gupta

body2008

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

CWP-2791 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 102 Vinay Kumar and others State of Haryana and CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA Present: - NIDHI GUPTA, J. (ORAL) 1. Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner writ in the nature of (Annexure P petitioners; the seniority of the petitioners by counting their past service and grant them all the consequential benefits including promotion, ACP, notional pay fixation etc. 2. petitioners that vide order dated 19.03.2008 (Annexure P have been appointed Officers (AIPRO) against regular sanctioned posts in the Department of Information, Public Relations a completion of 02 months training the petitioners are posted against regular sanctioned posts vide order 2791-2020 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP Date of Decision: Vinay Kumar and others Versus State of Haryana and another CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA Mr. Sumit Sangwan, Advocate for the petitioners. Ms. Ruchi Sekhri, Addl. A.G., Haryana. NIDHI GUPTA, J. (ORAL) Present writ petition under Article Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner writ in the nature of Certiorari for quashing the order dated (Annexure P-12) passed by respondent No. 2 rejecting the claim of the petitioners; AND/OR to further direction seniority of the petitioners by counting their past service and grant them all the consequential benefits including promotion, ACP, notional pay fixation etc. It is, inter alia, submitted petitioners that vide order dated 19.03.2008 (Annexure P have been appointed as Assistant Information and Public Relation Officers (AIPRO) against regular sanctioned posts in the Department of Information, Public Relations and Languages on contractual completion of 02 months training given by the Department concerned the petitioners are posted against regular sanctioned posts vide order IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-2791-2020 Date of Decision: 09.07.2026 .… Petitioners .... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA Mr. Sumit Sangwan, Advocate for the petitioners. Ms. Ruchi Sekhri, Addl. A.G., Haryana. etition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioners for issuance of a for quashing the order dated 18.12.2019 12) passed by respondent No. 2 rejecting the claim of the to further direction to the respondents to finalize seniority of the petitioners by counting their past service and grant them all the consequential benefits including promotion, ACP, notional submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that vide order dated 19.03.2008 (Annexure P-1) petitioners as Assistant Information and Public Relation Officers (AIPRO) against regular sanctioned posts in the Department of nd Languages on contractual basis. On given by the Department concerned, the petitioners are posted against regular sanctioned posts vide order RISHU KATARIA 2026.07.10 19:49 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. CWP-2791 dated 30.05.2008 (Annexure P taking concurrence of Finance Department in this regard. Thereafter, vide order/letter dated the petitioners on the post of AIPRO has been regul the petitioners are continuously working on the said post from their joining till regularization. have moved (Annexures seniority in the Department the benefit of their past service. approached this Court by way of disposed vide order dated 04.11.2019 (Annexure P No. 2 was directed to decide the aforesaid representations moved by the petitioners. (Annexure P extract of the impugned order, reads as follows: 2791-2020 -2- dated 30.05.2008 (Annexure P-2) created by Haryana Government by taking concurrence of Finance Department in this regard. Thereafter, vide order/letter dated 11.09.2014 (Annexure P the petitioners on the post of AIPRO has been regul the petitioners are continuously working on the said post from joining till regularization. It is further submitted that the petitioners have moved representations dated 30.11.2016 and 10.10.2019 s P-5 and P-6, respectively) qua seniority in the Department and prepare the seniority list and give the benefit of their past service. Thereafter, the petitioners have approached this Court by way of CWP-31876 disposed vide order dated 04.11.2019 (Annexure P No. 2 was directed to decide the aforesaid representations moved by the petitioners. Pursuant thereto, impugned order dated 18.11.2019 (Annexure P-12) has been passed by the respondent No. 2. Relevant extract of the impugned order, reads as follows: “xxx xxx The para No. 3 of the regularization policy dated 18.06.2014 and 20.06.2014 provides for the fixing seniority of such officials wh regularized under the policy and the same is re as under:- “The seniority of the employees so regularized shall be fixed from the date of their regularization and they shall be placed below in the seniority to the employees last regular basis before the date of regularization of these employees. However, the inter such employees shall be determined in accordance with the date of their joining the post on contract basis. If the date of joining the p basis of such employees is the same, then the older employee shall rank senior to the employee younger in age.” 2) created by Haryana Government by taking concurrence of Finance Department in this regard. Thereafter, .09.2014 (Annexure P-3), the appointments of the petitioners on the post of AIPRO has been regularized. Since then the petitioners are continuously working on the said post from date of It is further submitted that the petitioners 30.11.2016 and 10.10.2019 ) qua fixing their intra and inter-se are the seniority list and give them Thereafter, the petitioners have 31876-2019 and the same was disposed vide order dated 04.11.2019 (Annexure P-9) and respondent No. 2 was directed to decide the aforesaid representations moved by the Pursuant thereto, impugned order dated 18.11.2019 en passed by the respondent No. 2. Relevant extract of the impugned order, reads as follows:- xxx The para No. 3 of the regularization policy dated 18.06.2014 and 20.06.2014 provides for the criteria of fixing seniority of such officials whose services were regularized under the policy and the same is re-produced The seniority of the employees so regularized shall be fixed from the date of their regularization and they shall be placed below in the seniority to the employees last appointed on the regular basis before the date of regularization of these employees. However, the inter-se-seniority of such employees shall be determined in accordance with the date of their joining the post on contract If the date of joining the post on contract basis of such employees is the same, then the older employee shall rank senior to the employee younger RISHU KATARIA 2026.07.10 19:49 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. CWP-2791 3. writ petition was adjourned against CWP of Haryana and others. 4. 1996 of 2024 decided on 16.04.2026; have been upheld dated 18.12.2019 (Annexure P to the respondents to consider the claim of the petitioner aforesaid policies Singh’s case (supra), benefits. 5. the same. 2791-2020 -3- Further, it is also relevant to mention here that the regularization policies of the year 2014 of Haryana Government have been quashed vide judgment/order dated 31.05.2018 by the Hon'ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in CWP No.17206 of 2014 titled as Yogesh Tyagi and another Vs State of Haryana and Others. The Haryana Government filed Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 31566 of 2018 in the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India against the said decision of Hon'ble Punjab and Haryana High Court. The Hon'ble Supreme Court vide order dated 26.11.2018 directed to maintain status quo in the matter. Keeping in view the aforesaid position, I am o view that the petitioners are not entitled for seniority and other consequential benefits including promotion, ACP, notional pay fixation etc. by counting their past service rendered on contractual basis w.e.f. 01.04.2008 and they will be given seniority and other benefits etc, w.e.f. the date of regularization i e. 28. 05.2014 and that also subject final outcome of SLP No. 31566 of 2018 pending in the Hon'ble Supreme Court or as the I order accordingly.” Consequently, vide last order dated 03.02.2020, present writ petition was adjourned sine die to await the decision of SLP filed against CWP-17206-2014 titled as Yogesh Tyagi and another vs. State of Haryana and others. It is pointed out that subsequen 1996 of 2024 titled as Madan Singh and others vs. State of Haryana, decided on 16.04.2026; the policies dated 16. have been upheld. It is accordingly prayed that dated 18.12.2019 (Annexure P-12) be set aside and to the respondents to consider the claim of the petitioner aforesaid policies upheld by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Singh’s case (supra), and petitioners be granted all consequential Learned State counsel submits that she Further, it is also relevant to mention here that the policies of the year 2014 of Haryana quashed vide judgment/order dated 31.05.2018 by the Hon'ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in CWP No.17206 of 2014 titled as Yogesh Tyagi and another Vs State of Haryana and Others. The Haryana Government filed Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 31566 18 in the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India against the said decision of Hon'ble Punjab and Haryana High Court. The Hon'ble Supreme Court vide order dated 26.11.2018 directed to maintain status quo in the matter. Keeping in view the aforesaid position, I am of the view that the petitioners are not entitled for seniority and other consequential benefits including promotion, ACP, notional pay fixation etc. by counting their past service rendered on contractual basis w.e.f. 01.04.2008 and they rity and other benefits etc, w.e.f. the date of regularization i e. 28. 05.2014 and that also subject to final outcome of SLP No. 31566 of 2018 pending in the Hon'ble Supreme Court or as the Court directs further. Consequently, vide last order dated 03.02.2020, present to await the decision of SLP filed Yogesh Tyagi and another vs. State It is pointed out that subsequently, in Civil Appeal No. Madan Singh and others vs. State of Haryana, the policies dated 16.06.2014 and 18.06.2014 It is accordingly prayed that the impugned order 12) be set aside and direction be issued to the respondents to consider the claim of the petitioners in light of by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Madan be granted all consequential submits that she has ‘no objection’ to RISHU KATARIA 2026.07.10 19:49 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. CWP-2791 6. 7. 18.12.2019 (Annexure P respondent consideration thereupon within a period of six months from today, while mind the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Singh’s (supra) 8. 09.07.2026 rishu 2791-2020 -4- Ordered accordingly. The present writ petition is allowed, 18.12.2019 (Annexure P-12) is set aside; with a direction to the respondent-State of Haryana/concerned Department to accord fresh consideration to the claim of petitioners; thereupon within a period of six months from today, while mind the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in ’s (supra). Pending application(s) if any also stand(s) disposed of. 2026 Whether speaking/reasoned Whether Reportable allowed, impugned order dated 12) is set aside; with a direction to the State of Haryana/concerned Department to accord fresh to the claim of petitioners; and pass a speaking order thereupon within a period of six months from today, while keeping in mind the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Madan Pending application(s) if any also stand(s) disposed of. ( NIDHI GUPTA ) JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Yes/No RISHU KATARIA 2026.07.10 19:49 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.