IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH (230) CWP-8864-2025 DATE OF DECISION: 20.07.2026 Balwinder Singh ........Petitioner VERSUS State of Punjab and others .........Respondents CORAM HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP TIWARI Present Mr.Amrik Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Charanpreet Singh, DAG, Punjab. Ms. Deepali Puri, Advocate, for respondents no.2 to 4. *** KULDEEP TIWARI, J (ORAL) 1. Through the instant petition, cast under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India, a challenge is thrown to the order dated 18.02.2025 (P-12) passed by the Deputy State Project Director, Samagra Shiksha Abhiyan, Punjab, vide which the claim of the petitioner for release of arrears of salary for the period from 01.04.2014 to 21.10.2015 has been rejected. 2. At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioner places reliance upon judgment rendered by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court on 23.07.2024 in CWP No. 3658-2017 and CWP-11923-2017 titled Balbinder Singh and others versus State of Punjab in the Principal Secretary and others’s case, (Annexure P-9), to submit that letter dated 23.05.2014 issued by the respondents was quashed and all the contractual employees working with the respondents with the Sarv Shikhya Abhiyan Authority, Punjab, who formed part of the 71479 employees, held entitled for the benefit as extended vide letter dated 08.05.2014. It is submitted that he is one of 71479 employees and, therefore, is entitled to similar relief. MAMTA 2026.07.21 16:15 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-8864-2025 2 3. Ms. Deepali Puri, Advocate, appearing for respondents no.2 to 4 has strongly opposed the prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner and submits that the petitioner is a fence sitter and after about nine years, he approached the authority through a legal notice, seeking the similar relief as was granted to the petitioner in the aforesaid Writ Petition (supra). She further submits that the petitioner has resigned from the service on 21.09.2015, therefore, he is not entitled for the asked for relief. 4. I have considered the submissions and finds merit in the contentions of learned counsel for the petitioner. First of all, the petitioner resigned from the post on 21.09.2015 would not create a legal impediment towards the petitioner to ask for arrears of salary from 01.04.2014 to 21.09.2015. Secondly, though the petitioner is a fence sitter but the Co- ordinate Bench while allowing the earlier writ petitions held all the 71479 employees entitled for the benefits as extended vide letter dated 08.05.2014. Therefore, the same relief cannot be declined to the petitioner on the ground of delay and latches. The only restriction to be imposed upon for the relief granted to the petitioner that he would not be entitled to the interest for the payment of arrears of salary. 5. Accordingly, the instant petition is disposed of with a direction to respondents no.2 to 4 to release the salary of the petitioner from 01.04.2014 to 21.09.2015 (the date of resignation), in view of the benefit extended vide letter dated 08.05.2014. 6. Disposed of accordingly. MAMTA 2026.07.21 16:15 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-8864-2025 3 7. All pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of accordingly. 20.07.2026 (KULDEEP TIWARI) mamta JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No MAMTA 2026.07.21 16:15 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document