IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 102 Civil Writ Petition No. 29 of 2015(O&M) Date of Decision: July 09 , 2026. Shiv Sagar ...... PETITIONER Versus State of Haryana and another ...... RESPONDENTS CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE HARPREET SINGH BRAR Present: Dr. Naresh Kaushik, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Harish Nain, DAG, Haryana. ***** HARPREET SINGH BRAR, J. CM No.10483-CWP-2026 Instant application has been filed under Section 151 of CPC for listing the writ petition on actual date and decide the same. Learned counsel for the applicant/petitioner submits that vide order dated 08.02.2019 passed by this Court the present writ petition alongwith the other connected matters was ordered to be adjourned sine die to await the decision in SLP against the Division Bench judgment in CWP No.17206 of 2014 (Yogesh Tyagi and another v. State of Haryana and others). Learned counsel further submits that now Hon’ble the Supreme Court has finally adjudicated the controversy vide judgment dated 16.04.2026 rendered in Civil Appeal No.1996 of 2024 titled as Madan Singh and others Vs. State of Haryana and others arising directly out of Yogesh Tyagi’s case (supra). OMKAR SINGH 2026.07.13 09:47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court, Chandigarh CWP No.29 of 2015(O&M) [2] In view of the above, the application is allowed and with consent of learned counsel for both the parties, the abovenoted writ petition is taken up on board for final decision for today itself. CWP-29 of 2015 1. Prayer in the present writ petition filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, is for issuance of a writ in the nature of Mandamus, directing the respondents to regularize the services of the petitioner on the post of Assistant Professor (Hindi) HES-II as per notification dated 16.06.2014 issued by the Government of Haryana, General Administration Department (General Services-I). 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner, inter alia, contends that the petitioner was appointed as Guest Faculty Lecturer in Hindi subject with respondent No.2 after going through a transparent selection process and he had joined as such on 06.09.2008. Learned counsel submits that the petitioner possesses requisite qualifications and fulfills eligibility criteria necessary for regularization of his services as per policy dated 16.04.2014, wherein the State Government has decided for regularization of all Guest Faculty Lecturers who have completed three years of service as on 28.05.2014. Learned counsel also submits that the petitioner in the interregnum was appointed to the post of PGT Hindi and joined as such on 16.05.2014 at Govt. Sr. Secondary School, Azmabad Mokhuta, Mohindergarh. It is submitted that petitioner, has worked as Assistant Professor (Hindi) HES-II from 06.09.2008 to 13.05.2014 and completed more than three years of service, therefore, he should be regularized on the post of Assistant Professor (Hindi) HES-II as he has been working on the same grade of OMKAR SINGH 2026.07.13 09:47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court, Chandigarh CWP No.29 of 2015(O&M) [3] HES-II of the State Government. The respondent-department has illegally not considered his case for regularization. The petitioner performed his duties to the satisfaction of the superiors since the date of his appointment and there was no complaint, whatsoever, with regard to his work and conduct. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner, at this stage, submits that the petitioner would be satisfied in case his case is considered and decided by the respondents in the light of judgment rendered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Madan Singh’s case (supra), by passing a speaking order after affording an opportunity of hearing to them. 4. Learned State counsel submits that case of the petitioner would be examined in the light of aforesaid judgment passed in Madan Singh’s case (supra) and appropriate order would be passed by the respondents in a time bound manner after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. 5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after perusing the record of the case with their able assistance, it transpires that the Hon’ble Supreme Court decided a bunch of cases on 16.04.2026 and Madan Singh’s case (supra) is the lead case, wherein regularization policy dated 18.06.2014 has been upheld. The relevant portion of the judgment reads as under: -- “25. Accordingly, the impugned judgment of the High Court dated 31.05.2018 stands partly modified as under: (a) It is held that Notifications dated 16.06.2014 and 18.06.2014 are valid and the judgment of the High Court to the extent it holds otherwise is set aside. The intervenors who are similarly situated and entitled to the benefit of the Notifications dated 16.06.2014 and 18.06.2014 shall be entitled to the reliefs flowing from such declaration, subject to verification by the competent authority. xxx xxx xxx (c) The employees, who had approached the High Court and who were granted liberty to take steps after the present batch of appeals were decided, are free to take appropriate steps in accordance with this judgment.” OMKAR SINGH 2026.07.13 09:47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court, Chandigarh CWP No.29 of 2015(O&M) [4] 6. In view of the above, present writ petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No.1 to examine the case of the petitioner in terms of judgment rendered by Hon’ble the Supreme Court in Madan Singh’s case (supra) and pass a speaking order after affording him an opportunity of hearing, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. Further, the decision taken shall be conveyed to the petitioner. 7. Needless to say, if case of the petitioner is considered favourably, he will be entitled to the same relief as has been extended to the petitioners in Yogesh Tyagi’s case (supra). 8. The pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of. ( HARPREET SINGH BRAR ) July 09 , 2026. JUDGE ‘om’ Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether reportable: Yes/No OMKAR SINGH 2026.07.13 09:47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court, Chandigarh