229 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS INDERAWATI CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HON'BLE MR Present Mr. for the Mr. R.N. Lohan, Advocate to the respondent. * SANJEEV PRAKASH 1. The present CWP-4963-2015 whereby the learned Single Bench having taken into consideration the judgment passed in Singh and Others and further taking regularized w.e.f. allowed the Writ Petition of the would be entitled to the relief by fiction of reinstatement by the award of the Labour Court granting continuity in service with back because she was not present for the period from 27.08.1987 to the benefit of regularization w.e.f. 01.04.1987 withdrawn. 2. Learned Department is fair IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS V/s. INDERAWATI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MEENAKSHI I. MEHTA Mr. Hitesh Pandit, Addl. A.G., Haryana., for the appellants. Mr. R.N. Lohan, Advocate to the respondent. **** SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA, J. (Oral) The present LPA assails order dated 07.05.2019 passed in 2015 whereby the learned Single Bench having taken into consideration the judgment passed in CWP- Singh and Others Vs. State of Haryana and taking into consideration that the respondent was w.e.f. 01.04.1987 treating to be in service from 01.04.1986, allowed the Writ Petition of the respondent ntitled to the relief by fiction of reinstatement by the award of abour Court granting continuity in service with back because she was not present for the period from 27.08.1987 to of regularization w.e.f. 01.04.1987 Learned State counsel submits that the decision taken by the Department is fair and justified as she was not working IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH LPA-1503-2019 (O&M) Date of Decision:19th of May, 2025 ..…...Appellant(s) .....Respondent(s) SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA MEENAKSHI I. MEHTA Hitesh Pandit, Addl. A.G., Haryana., Mr. R.N. Lohan, Advocate to the respondent. LPA assails order dated 07.05.2019 passed in 2015 whereby the learned Single Bench having taken into -20157-2013 titled as Inderaj State of Haryana and Others decided on 15.01.2018 consideration that the respondent was initially 01.04.1987 treating to be in service from 01.04.1986, respondent holding that the respondent ntitled to the relief by fiction of reinstatement by the award of abour Court granting continuity in service with back-wages. Merely because she was not present for the period from 27.08.1987 to 21.09.1992, of regularization w.e.f. 01.04.1987 granted to her could not be counsel submits that the decision taken by the justified as she was not working nor she was one of Suresh Kumar 2025.05.22 09:07 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document LPA-1503-2019 the petitioners who CWP-4743-1986 Court which applied service in the year was initially Ticket Verifier illegally on 27.0 reinstating and continuity be placed in the same ca appointed between 2 considered her representation and regularized her w.e.f. 01.04.1987. There was no occasion 3. Therefore, t not warrant any interference. The Appeal is accordingly respondent shall be treated 4. Al accordingly. May 19, 2025 Ess Kay Whether speaking / reasoned Whether Reportable 2019 (O&M) the petitioners who had originally filed the 1986. However, we take note of the orders passed by the High Court which applied universally to all the Ticket Verifiers who service in the year 1986. Admittedly, the respondent was in service initially appointed as Helper on 05.04. Ticket Verifier w.e.f. 20.02.1986. Her services had been terminated illegally on 27.08.1987 and the Labour Court passed an award in her favour and continuity in service with full be placed in the same category as all the other between 20.02.1986 and 27.08.1987 her representation and regularized her w.e.f. 01.04.1987. There was no occasion to revise the date of regularization. Therefore, the order passed by the learned Single Bench not warrant any interference. The Appeal is accordingly respondent shall be treated to be regularized w.e.f. All pending applications in this [SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA [MEENAKSHI I. MEHTA 2025 Whether speaking / reasoned : Whether Reportable : originally filed the Writ Petition i.e. . However, we take note of the orders passed by the High Ticket Verifiers who were in . Admittedly, the respondent was in service. She on 05.04.1984 and was absorbed as a er services had been terminated abour Court passed an award in her favour with full back-wages. Thus, she would other Ticket Verifiers who were .08.1987. The Department had also her representation and regularized her w.e.f. 01.04.1987. There revise the date of regularization. he order passed by the learned Single Bench does not warrant any interference. The Appeal is accordingly dismissed. The to be regularized w.e.f. 01.04.1987. pending applications in this case are disposed of SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA] JUDGE MEENAKSHI I. MEHTA] JUDGE : Yes / No : Yes / No i.e. Suresh Kumar 2025.05.22 09:07 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document