CWP-20707-2021 (O&M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT Jaswant State of Punjab & CORAM: Present: NAMIT KUMAR, J. 1. Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of quashing the order dated 25.08.2021 (Annexure P No.2, whereby w.e.f. 01.06.1994 followed by regularization on GPF Pension Sch sought against the petitioner by counting his entire service by applying the old GPF Pension Scheme, as admissible to the appointees prior to release all due retirement benefits of the petitioner together with interest for the delay @ 12% per annum (O&M) (1) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Versus State of Punjab & others HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAMIT KUMAR Mr. R.K.Arora, Senior Advocate, with Mr. J.S.Bhogal, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. P.I.P.Singh, Addl. AG, Punjab. Mr. Swarn Tiwana, Advocate, for Mr. Mohit Kumar, Advocate, for respondent No.3. NAMIT KUMAR, J. (Oral) The present petition has been filed by the petitioners under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of quashing the order dated 25.08.2021 (Annexure P No.2, whereby the claim of the petitioner for counting 01.06.1994 followed by regularization on GPF Pension Scheme has been declined. sought against the respondents to release all post retirement benefits of the petitioner by counting his entire service by applying the old GPF Pension Scheme, as admissible to the appointees prior to release all due retirement benefits of the petitioner together with interest for the delay @ 12% per annum. IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-20707-2021 (O&M) Date of Decision: 13.07.2026 ...Petitioner ...Respondents HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAMIT KUMAR R.K.Arora, Senior Advocate, with Mr. J.S.Bhogal, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. P.I.P.Singh, Addl. AG, Punjab. Swarn Tiwana, Advocate, for Mr. Mohit Kumar, Advocate, for respondent No.3. The present petition has been filed by the petitioners under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of certiorari for quashing the order dated 25.08.2021 (Annexure P-16) passed by respondent for counting his daily wage service 01.06.1994 followed by regularization on 03.11.2011 by applying old . Further, directions have been all post retirement benefits of the petitioner by counting his entire service by applying the old GPF Pension Scheme, as admissible to the appointees prior to 01.04.2004 and also to release all due retirement benefits of the petitioner together with interest for The present petition has been filed by the petitioners under certiorari for 16) passed by respondent his daily wage service 03.11.2011 by applying old ons have been all post retirement benefits of the petitioner by counting his entire service by applying the old GPF Pension 01.04.2004 and also to release all due retirement benefits of the petitioner together with interest for VIMAL KUMAR 2026.07.14 14:05 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. CWP-20707-2021 (O&M) 2. petition is covered by the judgment passed by the Divi Court in CWP decided on 31.08.2010; ‘Municipal Council, Qadian Vs. Musthaq Maish & others 21.12.2023; Singh Vs. State of Punjab & others titled as ‘Nagar Panchayat, Sardulgarh Vs. Jagdev Singh & others decided on 16.01.2025; Amritsar Vs. Rangdev Singh & others LPA-363-2026 District Fazilka Vs. Jaswant Singh & others 3. as in CWP-2371 13.07.2026 Vimal (O&M) (2) Learned counsel for the parties are ad idem that the present writ petition is covered by the judgment passed by the Divi CWP-2371-2010 titled as ‘Harbans Lal Vs. State of Punjab 31.08.2010; LPA-666-2022 and other connected appeals titled as Municipal Council, Qadian Vs. Musthaq Maish & others 21.12.2023; CWP-16147-2023 and other connected cases titled Singh Vs. State of Punjab & others’ decided on Nagar Panchayat, Sardulgarh Vs. Jagdev Singh & others 16.01.2025; LPA-575-2026 titled Amritsar Vs. Rangdev Singh & others’ decided on 2026 titled as ‘The Market Committee, Abohar, Tehsil Abohar, District Fazilka Vs. Jaswant Singh & others Consequently, the instant petition is allowed in the same terms 2371-2010. Whether speaking/reasoned: Whether reportable: Learned counsel for the parties are ad idem that the present writ petition is covered by the judgment passed by the Division Bench of this Harbans Lal Vs. State of Punjab’ other connected appeals titled as Municipal Council, Qadian Vs. Musthaq Maish & others’ decided on and other connected cases titled as ‘Surjit ’ decided on 30.01.2024; LPA-106-2025 Nagar Panchayat, Sardulgarh Vs. Jagdev Singh & others’ titled as ‘Municipal Corporation ’ decided on 27.02.2026 as well as The Market Committee, Abohar, Tehsil Abohar, District Fazilka Vs. Jaswant Singh & others’ decided on 04.05.2026. the instant petition is allowed in the same terms (NAMIT KUMAR) JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Yes/No Learned counsel for the parties are ad idem that the present writ sion Bench of this ’ other connected appeals titled as ’ decided on Surjit 2025 ’ Municipal Corporation as well as The Market Committee, Abohar, Tehsil Abohar, the instant petition is allowed in the same terms VIMAL KUMAR 2026.07.14 14:05 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.