IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA 113 Suman Chaudhary State of Haryana and CORAM: Present:- NIDHI GUPTA J. (Oral) 1. in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondents to regularize the services of the petitioner and grant all consequential service benefits, along with interest @ 12% per annum. 2. petitioner that pur applications were invited for three sanctioned posts of Protection Officer-cum petitioner participated in the selection process and, upon being selected, was issued P-2), pursuant to which she joined the post on 06.01.2012. Since then, the petitioner has been continuously working to the satisfaction of the CWP-29319-2026 (O & M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No.29319 of 2026 Date of decision : Suman Chaudhary Versus State of Haryana and another CORAM:- HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA Mr. Jamshed Ahmed, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Harish Kumar Nain, DAG, Haryana. NIDHI GUPTA J. (Oral) Prayer in the present writ petition is for issuance of a writ the nature of Mandamus directing the respondents to regularize the services of the petitioner and grant all consequential service benefits, along with interest @ 12% per annum. It is, inter alia, submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that pursuant to the advertisement (Annexure P applications were invited for three sanctioned posts of Protection cum-Child Marriage Prohibition Officer (Female). The petitioner participated in the selection process and, upon being selected, was issued appointment letter dated 04.01.2012 (Annexure 2), pursuant to which she joined the post on 06.01.2012. Since then, the petitioner has been continuously working to the satisfaction of the 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 29319 of 2026 (O & M) Date of decision :-10.09.2026 …..Petitioner …..Respondents HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA Jamshed Ahmed, Advocate Mr. Harish Kumar Nain, DAG, Haryana. Prayer in the present writ petition is for issuance of a writ the nature of Mandamus directing the respondents to regularize the services of the petitioner and grant all consequential service benefits, , submitted by learned counsel for the suant to the advertisement (Annexure P-1), applications were invited for three sanctioned posts of Protection Child Marriage Prohibition Officer (Female). The petitioner participated in the selection process and, upon being appointment letter dated 04.01.2012 (Annexure 2), pursuant to which she joined the post on 06.01.2012. Since then, the petitioner has been continuously working to the satisfaction of the VIJAY ASIJA 2026.09.11 16.59 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document respondent passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in “ and others entitled to consideration for regularization having rendered more than ten years of continuous service. this stage, the petitioner would be satisfied if the present writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to consider her claim for regularization in accordance with law, while keeping in vi judgment in that the petitioner had already submitted a representation dated 01.06.2026 (Annexure P consideration petition be treated as a representation. 3. 4. on behalf of respondents and present writ petition as a representation, the petitioner may be to submit a fresh representation with regard to her grievance. 5. permitted to submit a fresh representation and the respondents be directed to consider the same in the light of the judgment in case (supra). 6. the prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner being accepted CWP-29319-2026 (O & M) respondent-Department. It is contended that, in view of the judgme passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in “ and others”, reported as 2024 SCC OnLine SC 3826, the petitioner is entitled to consideration for regularization having rendered more than ten years of continuous service. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that, at this stage, the petitioner would be satisfied if the present writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to consider her claim for regularization in accordance with law, while keeping in vi judgment in Jaggo’s case (supra). Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner had already submitted a representation dated 01.06.2026 (Annexure P-5), which is stated to be pending consideration before the respondent-Authority petition be treated as a representation. Notice of motion. Mr. Harish Kumar Nain, DAG, on behalf of respondents and submits that, instead of treating the present writ petition as a representation, the petitioner may be to submit a fresh representation with regard to her grievance. Learned counsel for the petitioner prays that she may be permitted to submit a fresh representation and the respondents be directed to consider the same in the light of the judgment in (supra). Learned State counsel submits that he has no o the prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner being accepted 2 Department. It is contended that, in view of the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in “Jaggo vs. Union of India ”, reported as 2024 SCC OnLine SC 3826, the petitioner is entitled to consideration for regularization having rendered more than l for the petitioner further submits that, at this stage, the petitioner would be satisfied if the present writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to consider her claim for regularization in accordance with law, while keeping in view the (supra). Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner had already submitted a representation dated 5), which is stated to be pending Authority, or the present writ Mr. Harish Kumar Nain, DAG, Haryana accepts notice submits that, instead of treating the present writ petition as a representation, the petitioner may be asked to submit a fresh representation with regard to her grievance. Learned counsel for the petitioner prays that she may be permitted to submit a fresh representation and the respondents be directed to consider the same in the light of the judgment in Jaggo’s submits that he has no objection to the prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner being accepted VIJAY ASIJA 2026.09.11 16.59 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document at this stage. It is, however, submitted that the service tenure of the petitioner would require verification to ascertain whether she has rendered continuous and satisfactory consideration for regularization. 7. expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the present writ petition is submits a fresh representation before the Competent Authority within a period of two weeks from today, the same shall be considered and decided by the said Authority by passing a speaking and reasoned order, in accordance with law, within a perio thereafter Competent Authority shall also keep in view the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in relevant rules/instructions governing the clai 8. September 10 Vijay Asija Whether speaking/reasoned Yes / No Whether Reportable Yes / No CWP-29319-2026 (O & M) at this stage. It is, however, submitted that the service tenure of the petitioner would require verification to ascertain whether she has rendered continuous and satisfactory service so as to be eligible for consideration for regularization. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the present writ petition is disposed of with a direction that, in case the p submits a fresh representation before the Competent Authority within a period of two weeks from today, the same shall be considered and decided by the said Authority by passing a speaking and reasoned order, in accordance with law, within a perio thereafter. While considering the claim of the petitioner, the Competent Authority shall also keep in view the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Jaggo’s case relevant rules/instructions governing the clai Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of. September 10, 2026 Whether speaking/reasoned Yes / No Whether Reportable Yes / No 3 at this stage. It is, however, submitted that the service tenure of the petitioner would require verification to ascertain whether she has service so as to be eligible for After hearing learned counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the present writ with a direction that, in case the petitioner submits a fresh representation before the Competent Authority within a period of two weeks from today, the same shall be considered and decided by the said Authority by passing a speaking and reasoned order, in accordance with law, within a period of four months . While considering the claim of the petitioner, the Competent Authority shall also keep in view the judgment passed by Jaggo’s case (supra), as also the relevant rules/instructions governing the claim of the petitioner. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of. ( NIDHI GUPTA ) JUDGE VIJAY ASIJA 2026.09.11 16.59 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document