IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA 216 Rohtash Kumar State of Haryana and CORAM: Present:- NIDHI GUPTA J. (Oral) 1. a writ in the nature of Mandamus directing the Department not to terminate the services of the petitioner till the decision of SLP(C) No.33265 of 2018 titled as “State of Haryana vs. Yogesh Tyagi others”; and further direction to grant the benefit of regularization as per the decision pending the said SLP. 2. petitioner that t (Group-D) Societies, B after undergoing the due selection process and has been continuously discharging his duties with honesty and diligence ever since. CWP-20640-2022 (O & M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No.20640 of 2022 Date of decision : Rohtash Kumar Versus State of Haryana and others CORAM:- HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA Mr. Mazlish Khan, Advocate with Mr. Mohd. Tarif, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Harish Kumar Nain, DAG, Haryana. NIDHI GUPTA J. (Oral) Prayer in the present civil writ petition is for issuance of a writ in the nature of Mandamus directing the Department not to terminate the services of the petitioner till the decision of SLP(C) No.33265 of 2018 titled as “State of Haryana vs. Yogesh Tyagi others”; and further direction to grant the benefit of regularization as decision pending the said SLP. It is inter alia submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner was appointed as a D) in the office of the Assistant Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Bhattu Kalan (respondent No.3) after undergoing the due selection process and has been continuously discharging his duties with honesty and diligence ever since. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 20640 of 2022 (O & M) Date of decision :-16.07.2026 …..Petitioner …..Respondents HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA Mazlish Khan, Advocate with Mr. Harish Kumar Nain, DAG, Haryana. Prayer in the present civil writ petition is for issuance of a writ in the nature of Mandamus directing the Department not to terminate the services of the petitioner till the decision of SLP(C) No.33265 of 2018 titled as “State of Haryana vs. Yogesh Tyagi and others”; and further direction to grant the benefit of regularization as submitted by learned counsel for the he petitioner was appointed as a part-time Sweeper in the office of the Assistant Registrar, Cooperative hattu Kalan (respondent No.3) against a sanctioned post after undergoing the due selection process and has been continuously discharging his duties with honesty and diligence ever since. VIJAY ASIJA 2026.07.17 16.43 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Throughout his service, his work and conduct have remained satisfactory, as evidenced by the Experience Certificate dated 09.08.202 educational qualification for the post, having passed the Secondary School Examination in the year 1996 (Annexure P paid remuneration on daily years of continuous service respondents to regularize his services, but no action wa petitioner claims that his case is fully covered under the Haryana Government Regularization Policy dated clarification dated in Yogesh Tyagi v. State of Haryana the Hon’ble wherein status quo employees have also been granted interim protection by this Court.The petitioner further relies upon the Government notification dated 07.07.2014 period of s he had completed the requisite qualifying service on Despite serving a legal notice dated regularization and continuation in service, the respondents failed to consider his claim. Apprehending termination during the pendency of the proceedings before the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the petitioner has CWP-20640-2022 (O & M) roughout his service, his work and conduct have remained satisfactory, as evidenced by the Experience Certificate dated 09.08.2021 (Annexure P-2). The petitioner possesses the requisite educational qualification for the post, having passed the Secondary hool Examination in the year 1996 (Annexure P paid remuneration on daily-wage basis. Having rendered more than years of continuous service, the petitioner repeatedly requested the respondents to regularize his services, but no action wa petitioner claims that his case is fully covered under the Haryana Government Regularization Policy dated clarification dated 28.07.2014 (Annexures P The said policy had been set aside by this Hon'ble Court Yogesh Tyagi v. State of Haryana; and Hon’ble Supreme Court vide SLP (C) No. 33265 of 2018 wherein status quo was ordered. It is submitted that similarly situated employees have also been granted interim protection by this Court.The petitioner further relies upon the Government notification 07.07.2014, under which employees completing the prescribed period of service became eligible for regularization, and asserts that he had completed the requisite qualifying service on Despite serving a legal notice dated regularization and continuation in service, the respondents failed to nsider his claim. Apprehending termination during the pendency of the proceedings before the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the petitioner has 2 roughout his service, his work and conduct have remained satisfactory, as evidenced by the Experience Certificate dated 2). The petitioner possesses the requisite educational qualification for the post, having passed the Secondary hool Examination in the year 1996 (Annexure P-3), and has been wage basis. Having rendered more than 14 , the petitioner repeatedly requested the respondents to regularize his services, but no action was taken. The petitioner claims that his case is fully covered under the Haryana Government Regularization Policy dated 18.06.2014 and the (Annexures P-4 and P-5). set aside by this Hon'ble Court and the matter was taken before SLP (C) No. 33265 of 2018, ordered. It is submitted that similarly situated employees have also been granted interim protection by this Court.The petitioner further relies upon the Government notification , under which employees completing the prescribed ervice became eligible for regularization, and asserts that he had completed the requisite qualifying service on 01.04.2018. Despite serving a legal notice dated 22.03.2022 requesting regularization and continuation in service, the respondents failed to nsider his claim. Apprehending termination during the pendency of the proceedings before the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the petitioner has VIJAY ASIJA 2026.07.17 16.43 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document approached this Court seeking protection of his service and consideration of his claim for regularization in accordance w 3. Bench of this Court, the writ petition was adjourned the outcome of SLP(C)No.33265 of 2018 titled as “ vs. Yogesh Tyagi and Yogesh Tyagi and another vs. State of Haryana and others. 4. 1996 of 2024 Haryana, decided on 16.04.2026; and 18.06.2014 (Annexure P accordingly prayed that consider the claim of the petitioner upheld by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in (supra), and petitioner 5. came for consideration before the Division Bench of this Court in LPA-1810 Haryana and others, 23.04.2026, relevant paras of which, read as under: CWP-20640-2022 (O & M) approached this Court seeking protection of his service and consideration of his claim for regularization in accordance w Vide last order dated 12.09.2022 passed by a predecessor Bench of this Court, the writ petition was adjourned the outcome of SLP(C)No.33265 of 2018 titled as “ vs. Yogesh Tyagi and others” filed against CWP Yogesh Tyagi and another vs. State of Haryana and others. It is pointed out that subsequently, 1996 of 2024 titled as Madan Singh and others vs. State of Haryana, decided on 16.04.2026; the policies dated 16. 06.2014 (Annexure P-4 herein) have been upheld accordingly prayed that direction be issued to the respondents to consider the claim of the petitioner in light of aforesaid policies upheld by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in and petitioners be granted all consequential benefits. Learned State counsel points out that the said issue came for consideration before the Division Bench of this Court in 1810-2025 titled as Aas Mohammad and others vs. State of ryana and others, which was disposed of vide judgment dated 23.04.2026, relevant paras of which, read as under: “5. Today, when the matter is taken up, we are informed that the Hon'ble Supreme Court has finally decided the issue raised in the case of (supra) while considering a bunch of connected cases, vide judgment rendered in Madan Singh and others vs. State of Haryana, Civil Appeal No. 1996 of 2024, decided on 16.04.2026. 6. The judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court elaborately deals with the policy for regularization framed by the State of Haryana and keeping in view the 3 approached this Court seeking protection of his service and consideration of his claim for regularization in accordance with law. Vide last order dated 12.09.2022 passed by a predecessor Bench of this Court, the writ petition was adjourned sine die to await the outcome of SLP(C)No.33265 of 2018 titled as “State of Haryana against CWP-17206-2014 titled as Yogesh Tyagi and another vs. State of Haryana and others. It is pointed out that subsequently, in Civil Appeal No. Madan Singh and others vs. State of the policies dated 16.06.2014 4 herein) have been upheld. It is direction be issued to the respondents to in light of aforesaid policies upheld by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Madan Singh’s case be granted all consequential benefits. State counsel points out that the said issue came for consideration before the Division Bench of this Court in titled as Aas Mohammad and others vs. State of which was disposed of vide judgment dated 23.04.2026, relevant paras of which, read as under: - Today, when the matter is taken up, we are informed that the Hon'ble Supreme Court has finally decided the issue raised in the case of Yogesh Tyagi (supra) while considering a bunch of connected cases, vide judgment rendered in Madan Singh and others vs. State of Haryana, Civil Appeal No. 1996 of 2024, The judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court ith the policy for regularization framed by the State of Haryana and keeping in view the VIJAY ASIJA 2026.07.17 16.43 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-20640-2022 (O & M) principles laid down by the Constitutional Bench in Uma Devi (supra), the permissible course of action available for the State to regularize services of the employees has been elaborately specified. 7. Learned Advocate General, Haryana, makes a statement before the Court that if a liberty is granted to the State to examine the individual claim of each of the employee (either appellants or respondents herein), then separate orders would be passed in respect of each of such claim keeping in view the principles laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Madan Singh (supra). 8. Although various submissions have been advanced on behalf of the respondents writ but we are not inclined to delve upon such arguments in view of the statement made by the learned Advocate General, Haryana, as per which, the claim of all employees would be accorded fresh consideration in the light of the judgment of the Hon' in the case of Madan Singh (supra). 9. In that view of the matter, all the appeals are disposed of with a direction upon the State of Haryana/its Bodies/Corporation/Nigam to accord fresh consideration to the claim of employees involved in batch of cases by passing a speaking order in respect of their claim for regularization within a period of six months. The judgment of the learned Single Judge under appeal stands modified in the light of the principles laid down by the Hon'ble Supre the case of Madan Singh (supra). Till an appropriate order in respect of claim of each of the employees is passed, status quo as exists today would be maintained. It goes without saying that the claim of regularization based on policy of 2011 w consideration keeping in view the principles laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Madan Singh (supra) and the order impugned in the present batch of appeals/writ petitions would not come in the way of fresh consideration of the claim of employees for regularization. 10. In order to facilitate a fresh consideration of claim of the individual employee, we direct each employee to submit a comprehensive representation to the department along with a copy of this order within period of two weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. 11. All pending misc. application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.” 4 principles laid down by the Constitutional Bench in Uma Devi (supra), the permissible course of action available for the State to regularize services of the has been elaborately specified. Learned Advocate General, Haryana, makes a statement before the Court that if a liberty is granted to the State to examine the individual claim of each of the employee (either appellants or respondents herein), ate orders would be passed in respect of each of such claim keeping in view the principles laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Although various submissions have been advanced on behalf of the respondents writ petitioners but we are not inclined to delve upon such arguments in view of the statement made by the learned Advocate General, Haryana, as per which, the claim of all employees would be accorded fresh consideration in the light of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Madan Singh (supra). In that view of the matter, all the appeals are disposed of with a direction upon the State of Haryana/its Bodies/Corporation/Nigam to accord fresh consideration to the claim of employees involved in this batch of cases by passing a speaking order in respect of their claim for regularization within a period of six months. The judgment of the learned Single Judge under appeal stands modified in the light of the principles laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Madan Singh (supra). Till an appropriate order in respect of claim of each of the employees is passed, status quo as exists today would be maintained. It goes without saying that the claim of regularization based on policy of 2011 will also be accorded consideration keeping in view the principles laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Madan Singh (supra) and the order impugned in the present batch of appeals/writ petitions would not come in the on of the claim of employees In order to facilitate a fresh consideration of claim of the individual employee, we direct each employee to submit a comprehensive representation to the department along with a copy of this order within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of certified All pending misc. application(s), if any, also VIJAY ASIJA 2026.07.17 16.43 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 6. disposed of in the above terms. 7. ‘no objection 8. the parties, present Civil Writ Petition stands the above order dated 23.04.2026 passed in case of Mohammad and others (supra); Haryana/concerned Department to accord fresh consideration to the claim of petitioner thereupon within a period of in mind the judgment Supreme Court in 9. July 16, 202 Vijay Asija Whether speaking/reasoned Yes / No Whether Reportable Yes / No CWP-20640-2022 (O & M) It is prayed that the present writ petition be also disposed of in the above terms. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he has no objection’ to the same. Accordingly, with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, present Civil Writ Petition stands the above order dated 23.04.2026 passed in case of Mohammad and others (supra); with a direction to the State of Haryana/concerned Department to accord fresh consideration to the claim of petitioner for regularization; and pass a speaking order thereupon within a period of 06 months in mind the judgment dated 16.04.2026 Supreme Court in Madan Singh’s case (Supra) Pending application(s) if any also stand(s) disposed of. , 2026 speaking/reasoned Yes / No Whether Reportable Yes / No 5 It is prayed that the present writ petition be also counsel for the petitioner submits that he has Accordingly, with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, present Civil Writ Petition stands disposed of in terms of the above order dated 23.04.2026 passed in case of Aas with a direction to the State of Haryana/concerned Department to accord fresh consideration to the for regularization; and pass a speaking order from today, while keeping dated 16.04.2026 passed by the Hon’ble ’s case (Supra). Pending application(s) if any also stand(s) disposed of. ( NIDHI GUPTA ) JUDGE VIJAY ASIJA 2026.07.17 16.43 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document