132 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No.16474 of 2025 Date of Decision: 29.05.2025 Ram Kumar and others …Petitioners Versus The State of Haryana and others …Respondents CORAM:HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE MEENAKSHI I. MEHTA Present:- Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Birla, Advocate, for the petitioners. * * * * SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA J. (Oral) 1. Notice of motion. 2. Mr. Vivek Chauhan, learned Addl. Advocate General, Haryana, accepts the notice on behalf of the respondents. 3. Both the counsel are ad-idem that the issue raised in the instant petition stands finally adjudicated by this Court in a bunch of Writ Petitions in which lead case was CWP No.14627 of 2024 titled as “Mahabir Singh Tanwar vs. State of Haryana and others” decided on 24.04.2025, in which this Court has held as under:- “9. We have noticed the aforesaid submissions. However, the same would have no impediment in disposing of all these writ petitions as the claim of the writ petitions has to be decided finally now in terms of the order passed by the Supreme Court on 20.02.2025 in Miscellaneous application Dairy No.2400 of 2024 in SEEMA SHARMA 2025.05.29 17:15 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment CWP No.16474 of 2025 -2- Civil Appeal No.3933 of 2023 with connected miscellaneous applications titled as “Union of India and another versus M. Siddaraj (supra). 10. We, therefore, dispose of all these writ petitions and allow them in the same terms as above and with further directions to the Administration-respondents to pass specific orders taking into consideration the facts of each case. For the said purpose, we allow the State Government to take decision within a period of two months henceforth as all of the petitioners are already retired and their retiral benefits would be accordingly required to be adjusted and released. 11. The State authorities shall also take into consideration any policy decision which the State Government may take with respect to the persons, who retired having put in more than six months and less than one year of service in their last year of tenure.” 4. In view thereto, we dispose of the present writ petition mutatis mutandis in terms of the order dated 24.04.2025 passed by this Court in CWP No.14627 of 2024 (supra) and connected cases. (SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA) JUDGE May 29, 2025 (MEENAKSHI I. MEHTA) seema JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether Reportable: Yes/No SEEMA SHARMA 2025.05.29 17:15 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment