1 CWP-5651-2021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 106 CWP No.5651 of 2021 Date of Decision: 14.07.2026 Bal Krishan ....Petitioner VERSUS Chaudhary Devi Lal University ....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARPREET SINGH BRAR Present : Mr. Parmender Singh, Advocate for Mr. Hansraj, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Rahul Dev Singh, Addl.AG, Haryana. **** HARPREET SINGH BRAR, J. 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 respondent to regularize the services of the petitioner in pursuance of policy dated 16.06.2014 (Annexure P3) issued by the State of Haryana. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner, inter alia, submits that vide order dated 10.03.2021 passed by this Court the present writ petition 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) and now Hon’ble the Supreme Court has decided a bunch of connected cases, lead case being Civil Appeal No.1996 of 2024 titled as Madan Singh and others Vs. State of Haryana and others including Yogesh Tyagi case (supra), the present writ petition has thus been listed for hearing by the Registry. 3. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner has limited his prayer to the extent that the present writ petition be treated as a comprehensive OMKAR SINGH 2026.07.15 09:48 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court, Chandigarh 2 CWP-5651-2021 representation and the same be ordered to be considered and decided by the respondent 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 him. 4. Learned State counsel submits that he has no objection in case direction is issued to the respondent to consider and decide the claim of the petitioner in the light of aforesaid judgment passed in Madan Singh’s case (supra) by passing a reasoned and speaking order in accordance with law. 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 2026.07.15 09:48 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court, Chandigarh 3 CWP-5651-2021 6. In view of the limited prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the present writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent to treat the present writ petition as a comprehensive representation and decide claim of the petitioner in terms of judgment rendered by Hon’ble the Supreme Court in Madan Singh’s case (supra) by passing 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 observe that in case the petitioner is found entitled to the relief claimed, all consequential benefits shall also be granted expeditiously, in accordance with law. 8. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of. (HARPREET SINGH BRAR) 14.07.2026 JUDGE ‘om’ Whether speaking/reasoned. : Yes/No Whether Reportable. : Yes/No OMKAR SINGH 2026.07.15 09:48 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court, Chandigarh