1 CWP-21842-2024 and other connected matters IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 244 Date of Decision: 07.07.2026 1.CWP-21842-2024 SURENDER KUMAR AND ANR ..Petitioners VERSUS UNION OF INDIA AND ORS ..Respondents 2.CWP-6455-2025 SUNIL KUMAR ..Petitioner VERSUS UNION OF INDIA AND ORS ..Respondents 3.CWP-9773-2025 ANIL KUMAR AND ANOTHER ..Petitioners VERSUS UNION OF INDIA AND ORS ..Respondents PARUL VERMA 2026.07.14 18:15 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. 2 CWP-21842-2024 and other connected matters 4.CWP-7073-2025 DEEPAK AND ANOTHER ..Petitioners VERSUS STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS ..Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARPREET SINGH BRAR Present : Mr. Lajpat Rai Sharma, Advocate for the petitioners in CWP-21842-2024 and CWP-6455-2025. Mr. Sunil Kumar Nehra (Sirsa), Advocate for the petitioners in CWP-9773-2025. Ms. Bhavna Datta, Senior Panel Counsel, Union of India in CWP-21842-2024, CWP-6455-2025 & CWP-9773-2025. Mr. Rajiv Malhotra, DAG Haryana. Mr. Balvinder Sangwan, Advocate for respondent No.3-Commission in CWP-21842-2024. Mr. Kanwal Goyal, Advocate and Ms. Sheena Dahiya, Advocate for the respondent-Commission in CWP-6455-2025, CWP-7073-2025 & CWP-9773-2025. **** HARPREET SINGH BRAR , J. (Oral) 1. With the consent of all the parties, the aforementioned writ petitions are taken up together and are being decided by this common judgment. However, for the sake of brevity, the facts are taken from CWP 21842-2024. PARUL VERMA 2026.07.14 18:15 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. 3 CWP-21842-2024 and other connected matters 2. This Civil Writ Petition has been filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of an appropriate writ, order or direction, particularly a writ in the nature of certiorari, for quashing Advertisement No. 42 to 67 of 2024 dated 02.08.2024 (Annexure P-1), to the extent that Conditions No. 11(ix) and 12 thereof are contrary to and in violation of Army Order Nos. 78 and 79, and for setting aside the order dated 21.08.2024 (Annexure P-7), whereby the application of the petitioners for participation in the recruitment process for the post of Assistant Professor pursuant to Advertisement No. 42 to 67 of 2024 dated 02.08.2024 (Annexure P-1) has been rejected. The petitioners further seek the issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to permit the petitioners to apply pursuant to the aforesaid advertisement, to allow them to participate in the recruitment process during the pendency of the present writ petition, and to consider their candidature in terms of Army Order Nos. 78 and 79. It is further prayed that the petitioners be permitted to apply for the advertised posts subject to the final outcome of the present writ petition. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners, inter alia, contended that respondent No. 2 issued Advertisement Nos. 42 to 67 of 2024 dated 02.08.2024 inviting applications for direct recruitment to the posts of Assistant Professor (College Cadre) in various subjects under the Higher Education Department (Annexure P-1). It is further submitted that Clause PARUL VERMA 2026.07.14 18:15 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. 4 CWP-21842-2024 and other connected matters 11(ix) and Clause 12 of the said advertisement provide that reservation for Ex-Servicemen of Haryana shall be governed by the instructions issued by the Government of Haryana vide letter dated 09.03.2022 and the clarification dated 13.04.2022 issued by the Chief Secretary to the Government of Haryana (Annexure P-2). 3.1. Learned counsel further contends that the aforesaid conditions are contrary to the provisions governing serving Army personnel. It is submitted that the Army has framed specific provisions under Army Order Nos. 78 and 79 providing for the issuance of a No Objection Certificate (NOC) to eligible serving personnel for applying to civil posts, and the concerned authorities are required to act in strict compliance with the said Army Orders. An advisory in this regard has also been issued (Annexure P-3). It is further submitted that, in accordance with the aforesaid Army Orders, the petitioners applied for the issuance of a No Objection Certificate (NOC) by submitting representations dated 05.07.2024 and 20.08.2024 before the competent military authorities (Annexures P-4 and P-5) and that being aggrieved by the conditions contained in Clauses 11(ix) and 12 of the advertisement, the petitioners also submitted a representation dated 09.08.2024 before Respondent No. 2 requesting that their candidature be considered in accordance with the provisions of Army Order Nos. 78 and 79 (Annexure P-6). It is submitted that Respondent No. 2, however, rejected the PARUL VERMA 2026.07.14 18:15 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. 5 CWP-21842-2024 and other connected matters petitioner's request vide order-cum-letter dated 21.08.2024 (Annexure P-7), without appreciating the provisions contained in the applicable Army Orders. 3.2. Learned counsel lastly submits that the competent military authority subsequently issued the requisite No Objection Certificate to the petitioner vide order dated 29.08.2024 in terms of Army Order Nos. 78 and 79 (Annexure P-8), thereby establishing that the petitioners were duly eligible to apply for civil employment and that the action of Respondent No. 2 in declining to consider their candidature is arbitrary, illegal and unsustainable in law. He further submits that the present writ petition, insofar as it related to petitioner No. 1 in CWP-21842-2024, was withdrawn vide order dated 08.11.2024. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the Union of India in CWP- 21842-2024, CWP-6455-2025 and CWP-9773-2025 submits that no reply is required to be filed on behalf of respondent No. 1, as no relief has been claimed against the Union of India and the contesting respondent is the Haryana Public Service Commission. Mr. Kanwal Goyal, learned counsel appearing for the respondent-Commission in CWP-6455-2025, CWP-7073- 2025 and CWP-9773-2025, submits that the reply on behalf of the contesting respondents has already been filed in all the writ petitions. PARUL VERMA 2026.07.14 18:15 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. 6 CWP-21842-2024 and other connected matters 5. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the respondent- Commission submits that, as per Advertisement Nos. 42 to 67 of 2024 dated 02.08.2024 (Annexure P-1), the last date for submission of online applications was fixed as 27.08.2024. Subsequently, vide public notice dated 30.10.2024, the Commission re-opened the online application portal, permitting candidates to submit applications from 06.11.2024 to 12.11.2024 up to 05:00 P.M. He further submits that the controversy involved in the present batch of writ petitions is no longer res integra. Reliance has been placed upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sudhir Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh (2023 SCC Online SC 1394), as well as the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in Jitender Kumar v. Haryana Public Service Commission and others, LPA-574-2026, decided on 26.02.2026, wherein it has been categorically held that a candidate seeking the benefit of reservation under the Ex-Servicemen category must possess the status of an Ex-Serviceman as on the last date prescribed for submission of applications. In other words, only a person who has already been discharged or retired from the Armed Forces on the cut-off date is entitled to claim such reservation. 6. Learned counsel submits that, admittedly, none of the petitioners in the present writ petitions had attained the status of Ex- Servicemen on the last date prescribed for submission of online applications, PARUL VERMA 2026.07.14 18:15 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. 7 CWP-21842-2024 and other connected matters as they were all serving personnel in the Armed Forces on the relevant date. Consequently, they were ineligible to claim reservation under the Ex- Servicemen category, and the respondent-Commission has rightly declined to entertain their claim. It is, therefore, contended that the impugned action is fully in consonance with the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court as well as the Division Bench of this Court and does not warrant any interference in exercise of the extraordinary writ jurisdiction of this Court. Accordingly, learned counsel prays that, in view of the binding precedents governing the issue and the admitted factual position, the present bunch of writ petitions deserves to be dismissed. 7. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and upon perusal of the record with their able assistance, this Court is of the considered view that the controversy involved in the present batch of writ petitions is no longer res integra. The issue stands authoritatively settled by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sudhir Singh (supra) and thereafter by the Division Bench of this Court in Jitender Kumar (supra). The law laid down therein unequivocally mandates that a candidate seeking the benefit of reservation under the Ex-Servicemen category must have acquired the status of an Ex-Serviceman on or before the last date prescribed for submission of applications. The eligibility of a candidate has to be determined with PARUL VERMA 2026.07.14 18:15 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. 8 CWP-21842-2024 and other connected matters reference to the cut-off date stipulated in the advertisement and cannot be altered on account of any subsequent event. 8. In the present case, it is an admitted position that none of the petitioners had been discharged or retired from service on the last date prescribed for submission of the online applications. They were all serving personnel on the relevant date and, therefore, did not possess the status of Ex-Servicemen so as to claim the benefit of reservation under the Ex- Servicemen category. The subsequent issuance of a No Objection Certificate or their discharge from service at a later stage cannot relate back to the cut- off date so as to confer eligibility which admittedly did not exist on the relevant date. 9. This Court is, therefore, of the considered opinion that the respondent-Commission has acted strictly in accordance with the terms of the advertisement as well as the law declared by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the Division Bench of this Court. No arbitrariness, illegality or perversity has been pointed out in the impugned action warranting interference in the exercise of the extraordinary writ jurisdiction under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India. Consequently, the present writ petitions are hereby dismissed. PARUL VERMA 2026.07.14 18:15 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. 9 CWP-21842-2024 and other connected matters 10. All pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. 11. Photocopy of this order be placed on the file of connected case. (HARPREET SINGH BRAR) JUDGE 07.07.2026 parul verma Whether speaking/reasoned. : Yes/No Whether Reportable. : Yes/No PARUL VERMA 2026.07.14 18:15 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.