CWP Nos.21492 and 25627 of 2012 and CWP-278-2013 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-21492-2012 Date of Decision: 02.07.2025 (1) Paramjit Kaur ......Petitioner(s) Versus Union Territory, Chandigarh and others ....Respondent(s) (2) CWP-25627-2012 (O & M) Paramjit Singh ......Petitioner(s) Versus Union Territory, Chandigarh and others ....Respondent(s) AND (3) CWP-278-2013 Date of Decision: 02.07.2025 Sushma Devi ......Petitioner(s) Versus Union Territory, Chandigarh and others ....Respondent(s) Shivani Gupta 2025.07.02 18:05 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP Nos.21492 and 25627 of 2012 and CWP-278-2013 2 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGMOHAN BANSAL Present: Ms. Twinkle Verma, Advocate, for Mr. Amar Vivek Aggarwal, Advocate, for the petitioner (in CWP-21492-2012). Mr. Pawan Kumar Goklaney and Mr. Ashish Goklaney, Advocates, for the petitioner. (in CWP-25627-2012 and CWP-278-2013). Mr. Avinit Avasthi, Addl. Standing Counsel, and Mr. Anmol Puri, Jr. Standing Counsel, for U.T., Chandigarh. **** JAGMOHAN BANSAL, J. (Oral) 1. By this common order, CWP Nos.21492, 25627 of 2012 and CWP-278-2013 are hereby adjudicated as issues involved and prayer sought in all the petitions are common. 2. The petitioners through instant petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India are seeking direction to respondent to grant one year extension as per notification dated 08.10.2012 issued by Government of Punjab. 3. The petitioners are retired Teachers. They were working with government aided private schools of U.T. Administration. They were not governed by Rules and Regulations applicable to employees of U.T. Administration. They have been made to retire on attaining the age of 58 years. They are claiming that Government of Punjab vide notification dated 08.10.2012 has provided for 2 years extension to its employees. The said notification is ipso facto applicable to U.T. Administration employees and Shivani Gupta 2025.07.02 18:05 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP Nos.21492 and 25627 of 2012 and CWP-278-2013 3 petitioners being employees of government aided schools are entitled to said benefit. 4. Learned counsels for the respondents submit that notification dated 08.10.2012 issued by Government of Punjab is not adopted by U.T. Administration for its government aided private school Teachers. The petitioners have already attained age of superannuation and they stand relieved. 5. The petitioners retired in 2011-12. They are claiming extension of one year on the basis of notification dated 08.10.2012 issued by Government of Punjab. Firstly, it was discretion of the employer to grant extension. It was not matter of right of the employee. Secondly, a period of 13 years from the date of superannuation of petitioners has passed away, thus, this Court does not find it appropriate to invoke its writ jurisdiction. 6. Dismissed. 7. The petitioners at this stage submit that they may be granted liberty to approach authorities. This order would not inhibit them to approach the authorities for the redressal of their grievance, if any. 02.07.2025 (JAGMOHAN BANSAL) shivani JUDGE Whether reasoned/speaking Yes Whether reportable No Shivani Gupta 2025.07.02 18:05 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document