CWP-35294-2024(O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 106 CWP No.35294 of 2024 Date of Decision: 10.09.2026 Manjeet ....Petitioner VERSUS State of Haryana and others ....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARPREET SINGH BRAR Present : Mr. S.K.Malik, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Rahul Dev Singh, Addl.AG, Haryana. **** HARPREET SINGH BRAR, J. CM No.16290-CWP of 2026 The present application has been filed under Section 151 of CPC for preponement of the date of hearing in the writ petition and deciding the same in terms of judgment rendered by Hon’ble the Supreme Court in Madan Singh and others v. State of Haryana and others, 2026 SCC Online (SC) 628. Notice of the application. Mr. Rahul Dev Singh, Addl.Advocate General, Haryana, who is present in Court on advance notice, accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State and raises no objection thereto. OMKAR SINGH 2026.09.10 18:03 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh CWP-35294-2024(O&M) -2- In view of the above, the instant application is allowed and with the consent of both the parties, the writ petition is taken up on board for final decision for today itself. CWP No.35294 of 2024 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 certiorari quashing order dated 22.10.2024 (Annexure P-24) whereby claim of the petitioner for regularization of services under the regularization policy dated 18/20.06.2014 (Annexure P-5) in the cadre of Craft Instructor (Fitter) has been rejected, contending it as wholly illegal, arbitrary, and patently violative of the principles of natural justice, more particularly since the precise issue concerning the entitlement of employees similarly situated to the petitioner to regularization under the aforementioned policy has already been conclusively adjudicated and resolved in their favour by this Court as well as the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India, and consequently, seeking the issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to forthwith regularize his services with effect from 28.05.2014 at par with his regularized colleagues, and to release and disburse the arrears of salary differential alongwith interest @18% to the petitioner. 2. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner would be satisfied in case his case is considered and decided by the respondents in the light of the aforesaid judgment rendered by Hon’ble the Supreme Court in Madan Singh’s case (supra), by passing a speaking order after affording an opportunity of hearing to him. 3. Learned State counsel submits that he has no objection in case direction is issued to the respondents to consider and decide the claim of the OMKAR SINGH 2026.09.10 18:03 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh CWP-35294-2024(O&M) -3- 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. 4. 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 follows: -- “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.” 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 respondent No.2 to examine the claim of the petitioner and decide the same in terms of judgment rendered by Hon’ble the Supreme Court in Madan Singh and others v. State of Haryana and others, 2026 SCC Online (SC) 628 by passing a speaking order after affording him an opportunity of hearing, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of OMKAR SINGH 2026.09.10 18:03 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh CWP-35294-2024(O&M) -4- certified copy of this order. Further, the decision taken shall be conveyed to the petitioner. 7. Needless to observe, 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) 10.09.2026 JUDGE ‘om’ Whether speaking/reasoned. : Yes/No Whether Reportable. : Yes/No OMKAR SINGH 2026.09.10 18:03 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh