CWP-29945 IN TH 240 Satish Kumar State of Hary CORAM: Present: HARPREET 1. Constitution mandamus to the petition interest @ 18 Further, a pra for quashing of responden vide letter da reimburseme 1 9945-2024 N THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJA AT CHANDIGA CWP Date Kumar VERSUS f Haryana and others HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HA Mr. Pankaj Gupta with Mr.Vai petitioner. Mr. Arun Singla, AAG, Haryana Mr. Sanjeev Kaushik, Advocate **** REET SINGH BRAR, J. (Oral) The present writ petition has bee tution of India with a prayer for issu us directing the respondents to mak etitioner on account of reimbursemen t @ 18% p.a. from the date of submiss r, a prayer was made for issuance of a shing resolution dated 27.12.2012 pa ondent No.2-Haryana Agro-Industries tter dated 07.01.2013 (Annexure P-3) rsement for retired employees was lim NJAB AND HARYANA DIGARH CWP-29945-2024 Date of Decision: October 09, 2025 .....Petitioner SUS .....Responden E HARPREET SINGH BRAR r.Vaibhav Gupta, Advocates for the aryana. ocate for respondent No.2. as been filed under Article 226 of the r issuance of a writ in the nature of o make the payment of Rs.3,06,501/ ent of medical bills, along with an bmission of bills till actual payment. ce of a writ in the nature of certiorari 12 passed by the Board of Directors ustries Corporation Limited circulated 3) whereby the extent of medical as limited to Rs.2 lakh per employee. , 2025 itioner ondents or the of the ure of ,501/- ith an ment. rari ectors ulated edical loyee. PUNEET CHAWLA 2025.10.20 12:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-29945 2. issue involve identical issu of 2016, title on 27.04.201 between retir resolution da Corporation. retirement ca further subm of 2017 title Bhatnagar a vide order d rendered by Industries C 17.11.2014 (A 3. controvert th J.K. Jain (su considered in 4. the record of employee of passed by the 2 9945-2024 Learned counsel for the petition nvolved in the present writ petition al issue was raised by similarly situate titled ‘A.K. Bhatnagar Vs. State of 04.2017, wherein it was specially he n retired employees and currently s ion dated 20.09.1972 passed by the Bo ion. The benefit accrued to the ent cannot be withdrawn by passin submits that the respondent-Corporat titled Haryana Agro-Industries ar and others, against the same whi rder dated 15.10.2019. He also pla ed by this Court in RSA-5771 of es Corporation and another Ve 014 (Annexure P-9) to support his cas Per contra, learned counsel for ert the legal position as highlighted i n (supra). He assures this Court tha ered in terms of judgment passed in A. Having heard learned counsel fo ord of the case, it transpires that admi ee of the respondent-Corporation. Th by the Board of Directors of respond petitioner inter alia contends that the etition is no longer res integra. An situated employees in CWP No.7957 te of Haryana and others’, decided ally held that there is no distinction ntly serving employees in terms of the Board of Directors of respondent the petitioner at the time of his passing a subsequent resolution. He rporation even moved LPA No.1401 ries Corporation Limited Vs. AK e which was dismissed as withdrawn so placed reliance on the judgment 1 of 2014 titled ‘Haryana Agro Versus J.K. Jain,’ decided on his case. el for respondent No.2 was unable to ghted in A.K. Bhatnagar (supra) and that case of the petitioner will be A.K. Bhatnagar (supra). nsel for the parties and after perusing t admittedly, the petitioner is a retired ion. The resolution dated 20.09.1972 espondent-Corporation states that the at the An 957 cided nction ms of ndent- f his n. He 401 AK drawn gment gro d on ble to and ill be rusing retired .1972 at the PUNEET CHAWLA 2025.10.20 12:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-29945 employees of employees o medical facil who are curr such division would be a conclusively was held that dated 20.09.1 medical reim 5. judgment ren 2017 titled ‘ and another of employees of Article 14 two-Judge be and others V (Civil) No. 1 was opined: “ the ret reimbu in-serv retired 3 9945-2024 ees of the respondent-Corporation w ees of the Government of Haryan l facilities. Nowhere has a distinction e currently in service and those who ivision into the same by introducin be against settled law. Pertinentl sively decided by this Court in A.K. ld that the words- ‘employees of Cor 20.09.1972 includes retired employee l reimbursement. Further still, reference in this r nt rendered by a Division Bench of itled ‘Housing Board Haryana, Pan ther Vs. Krishan Chander and other loyees devoid of any intelligible diffe cle 14 of the Constitution of India. T dge bench of the Hon’ble Supreme Co rs Vs. Yatinder Kumar Gupta and o o. 14826 of 2022 decided on 19.0 ined: We agree with the reasoning in e retired employees of the appellan imbursement at par with the State g service employees of the Board. tired employees is clear that they w tion would be treated at par with the aryana for the purpose of availing ction been drawn between employees e who have retired. As such, reading oducing resolution dated 27.12.2012 tinently, this issue has also been A.K. Bhatnagar (supra), wherein it f Corporation’ used in the resolution ployees for the purpose of grant of this regard can also be made to the ch of this Court in LPA No. 1865 of Panchkula through its Chairman others’ wherein creating two classes e differentia was held to be ultra vires dia. The same was also upheld by me Court in Housing Board Haryana and others, Special Leave to Appeal n 19.09.2022, wherein the following ng in the impugned judgment that llant Board are entitled to medical tate government employees and the ard. The appointment letter of the ey would be entitled to benefits as th the ailing loyees ading .2012 been rein it lution ant of to the 5 of man lasses vires by a ana peal owing that ical the the s as PUNEET CHAWLA 2025.10.20 12:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-29945 applica appoin rules a 13 of Service in resp regula corres which with th made and th benefit Regula the con toward reimbu scheme provid Court directi benefit 6. of with a dir claim of the A.K. Bhatna a speaking or a certified co 4 9945-2024 plicable to State government serv pointment letter, the employees of les applicable to the Haryana gove of the Haryana Housing Board rvice of Officers and Employees) Re respect of pay, leaves and other m gulations, the employees of the Bo rresponding rules of the State govern On the interpretation of the ich was issued by the Housing D ith the High Court that the benefi ade available to the employees of d therefore to single out the retire nefit, contrary to the terms of the a egulations, would be wrong. Payme e contributory provident fund schem wards medical reimbursement. imbursement has no link with th heme. The respondents are not ovident fund did not subsume med urt was, therefore, justified and rections. We hope and trust that th nefits of the judgment to all retirees In view of the discussion above, a direction to the respondents/comp f the petitioner and decide the same atnagar (supra). The respondents ing order within a period of three mo fied copy of this order, strictly in acc servants. As per Clause 7 of the of the Board are governed by the government employees. Regulation ard (Recruitment & Conditions of s) Regulations, 2006 also states that er matters not provided for in the e Board shall be governed by the overnment. the notification dated 28.01.2020, g Department, Haryana, we agree nefit of medical reimbursement is of the Housing Board, Haryana, etired employees to deny them this he appointment letter and the 2006 yment of a lump sum amount under cheme, was not a one-time payment nt. In our opinion, medical the contributory provident fund ot seeking pension. Contributory medical reimbursement. The High and correct in issuing the said at the petitioner - Board will give rees of the Board.” (emphasis added) above, the present petition is disposed s/competent authority to consider the same in terms of judgment passed in ents shall decide the same by passing ee months from the date of receipt of in accordance with law. Further, the the the tion s of that the the 020, gree nt is ana, this 006 nder ent ical fund tory igh said give posed er the sed in assing ipt of r, the PUNEET CHAWLA 2025.10.20 12:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-29945 decision take the petitioner forthwith by 7. disposed of. October 09, P.C 5 9945-2024 n taken thereof shall be conveyed to th itioner is found entitled to the relief so ith by the respondent/competent author Pending miscellaneous applicat ed of. er 09, 2025 Whether speaking/reasoned. : Whether Reportable. : d to the petitioner. Needless to say, if lief sought, the same shall be granted authority. pplication(s), if any, shall also stand (HARPREET SINGH BRAR) JUDGE Yes/No Yes/No say, if ranted stand RAR) PUNEET CHAWLA 2025.10.20 12:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document