LPA-893-2025 and connected matters 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH (108+263) CM-1701-LPA-2026; CM-3555-LPA-2026; CM-3554-LPA-2026; CM-2234-LPA-2025; CM-2235-LPA-2025; and CM-2236-LPA-2025 in/and LPA-893-2025 Date of Decision : July 22, 2026 Harbhajan Singh and others .. Appellants Versus State of Haryana and others .. Respondents (2) CM-1598-LPA-2026; CM-2593-LPA-2026; CM-2594-LPA-2026; CM-2560-LPA-2025; CM-2561-LPA-2025; CM-5449-LPA-2025; CM-5459-LPA-2025; CM-2562-LPA-2025; and CM-2563-LPA-2025 in/and LPA-1037-2025 Guru Mehar and others .. Appellants Versus State of Haryana and others .. Respondents (3) LPA-2381-2025 (O&M) Manoj Kumar and others .. Appellants Versus State of Haryana and others .. Respondents (4) LPA-3276-2025 (O&M) Pardeep Sharma and another .. Appellants Versus State of Haryana and others .. Respondents HARSHA RANI 2026.07.29 11:44 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document LPA-893-2025 and connected matters 2 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMARINDER SINGH GREWAL Present: Mr. I.P.S. Kohli, Advocate, with Mr. Sidharth Maini, Advocate, for the appellants in LPA-893-2020. Mr. D.S. Patwalia, Senior Advocate, with Mr. Gaurav Rana, Advocate for the appellants in LPA-1037-2025. Mr. G.S. Gopera, Advocate, for the appellants in LPA-2381-2025 and LPA-3276-2025. Mr. Sanjeev Kaushik, Addl. A.G., Haryana, for respondents No. 3 to 5 HVNPL, DHBVN and UHBVN. Mr. Kamal Sehgal, Senior Advocate, with Mr. Ravinder Pankaj, Advocate and Mr. Anurag Mor, Advocate, for respondents No. 6 to 10 in LPA-893-2025 and for respondents No. 18 to 22 in LPA-1037-2026. Mr. Rajesh Hooda, Advocate, for respondents No. 18 to 23 in LPA-1037-2025. Mr. Rampal Kaushik, Advocate, and Mr. Deepak Jaglan, Advocate, for respondents No. 21 to 29. Mr. U.K. Agnihotri, Advocate, with Ms. Anshul Agnihotri, Advocate and Mr. Anuj Y. Attri, Advocate,, for respondents in CM-5449-LPA-2025. HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI J. (ORAL) CM-2234-LPA-2025 in LPA-893-2025 Present application has been filed seeking condonation of delay of 02 days in filing the appeal. Keeping in view the averments made in the application, which are duly supported by an affidavit, the application is allowed. Delay of 02 days in filing the appeal is condoned. HARSHA RANI 2026.07.29 11:44 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document LPA-893-2025 and connected matters 3 CM-2560-LPA-2025 in LPA-1037-2025 Present application has been filed seeking condonation of delay of 11 days in filing the appeal. Keeping in view the averments made in the application, which are duly supported by an affidavit, the application is allowed. Delay of 11 days in filing the appeal is condoned. CM-1701-LPA-2026 in LPA-893-2025 Present application has been filed for impleading the applicants as respondents No. 22 to 27 in the present appeal. Keeping in view the averments made in the application, which are duly supported by an affidavit, the same is allowed. The applicants are allowed to be impleaded in the present appeal as respondents No. 22 to 27 and the amended memo of parties attached with the present application is taken on record. CM-3554-LPA-2026 in LPA-893-2025 Present application has been filed for impleading the applicant as respondent No. 28 in the present appeal. Keeping in view the averments made in the application, which are duly supported by an affidavit, the same is allowed. The applicant namely Surender is allowed to be impleaded in the present appeal as respondent No. 28 and the amended memo of parties attached with the present application is taken on record. CM-3555-LPA-2026 in LPA-893-2025 Present application has been filed for impleading the applicant as respondent No. 28 in the present appeal. HARSHA RANI 2026.07.29 11:44 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document LPA-893-2025 and connected matters 4 Keeping in view the averments made in the application, which are duly supported by an affidavit, the same is allowed. The applicant namely Narender is allowed to be impleaded in the present appeal as respondent No. 28 and the amended memo of parties attached with the present application is taken on record. CM-2561-LPA-2025 in LPA-1037-2025 Present application has been filed under Order 1 Rule 2(c) & (d) of Chapter 1-C, Volume V of the High Court Rules and Orders, read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, seeking permission for appellants No. 2 to 13 to file the present intra-court appeal as appellants and to be impleaded as necessary parties. Keeping in view the averments made in the application, which are duly supported by an affidavit, the same is allowed subject to all just exceptions. CM-5449-LPA-2025 in LPA-1037-2025 Present application has been filed for impleading the applicants as respondents No.24 to 26 in the present appeal. Keeping in view the averments made in the application, which are duly supported by an affidavit, the same is allowed. The applicants are allowed to be impleaded in the present appeal as respondents No. 24 to 26 and the amended memo of parties attached with the present application is taken on record. LPA-893-2025 and connected matters 1. By this common order, four Letter Patent Appeals, the details of which have been given in the heading, are being disposed of as all these HARSHA RANI 2026.07.29 11:44 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document LPA-893-2025 and connected matters 5 appeals involve the same question of law on similar facts. 2. The present appeal has been filed challenging the impugned judgment dated 18.02.2025 passed by the learned Single Judge in CWP No.26561 of 2021 titled as Sunil Kumar and others vs. State of Haryana and others and other connected cases, whereby, direction has been given as to how the revised merit list needs to be prepared. 3. Learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants argues that a uniform criteria was followed by the selecting agency for the various posts advertised by the HSSC which was made applicable upon everyone without there being any input from the appellants. The clauses given in the said advertisement for various posts as understood by the selection agency, have been implemented to mean that any candidate, who has an experience certificate and was produced at the time of scrutiny of the documents has been given marks though, such procedure laid down by the selecting agency has been adversely commented by the learned Single Judge to hold that such process could not have been undertaken. 4. Learned Senior Counsel for the appellants submits that the selection for the post of Shift Attendant was made on 08.03.2019 and for the last seven years, the selected candidates are working as Shift Attendant but out of the total 2426 posts of Shift Attendant selected and appointed, selection and appointment of about 260 candidates will be reconsidered and they might lose their job after such a long service. 5. Learned Senior Counsel for the appellants further submits that at this stage, they have become over-aged and are no longer eligible to compete and cannot compete for any other selection process and will be HARSHA RANI 2026.07.29 11:44 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document LPA-893-2025 and connected matters 6 prejudiced beyond repair. 6. Keeping in view the facts of the present case especially when no illegality has been done on their part as the policy/process was not only framed by the selecting authority but followed by them though, subsequently held to be bad by the learned Single Judge. 7. Learned Senior Counsel for the appellants further submits that as per the settled principle of law, all the efforts should be made to ensure that where the candidate is not at all fault qua his/her selection, the candidate does not suffer any irreparable loss so as to adjust them to continue in service. 8. Learned Senior Counsel for the appellants further submits that the selected candidates were to be appointed in three different Power Utilities of State of Haryana namely HVPNL, UHBVNL and HPGCL and as only 29 candidates, who had raised the grievance qua the selection process followed and are before this Court and nobody else has raised any grievance and after a period of seven years, no other candidate can be allowed to agitate such a grievance, the efforts should be made to adjust such 29 candidates upon reconsideration of their cases rather than terminating the services of 260 candidates so as to revise the merit list as per the direction given by the learned Single Judge. 9. Learned Senior Counsel for the appellants further submits that keeping in view the settled principle of law settled by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in Buddhi Nath Chaudhary vs. Abahi Kumar (2001) 3 SCC 328 that in such situation, efforts should be made to adjust and as of now, in HVPNL there are 48 vacancies against which all 29 respondents in the HARSHA RANI 2026.07.29 11:44 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document LPA-893-2025 and connected matters 7 appeal can be adjusted, the solution to the problem can be achieved without disturbing anyone and giving whatever the respondents are entitled for. 10. Reliance placed upon by the learned Senior Counsel for the appellants on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in Buddhi Nath Chaudhary’s case (supra), where the selection, and subsequent appointment, of candidates as Motor Vehicle Inspector in the State of Bihar was under challenge on account of not possessing the experience in an appropriate automobile institution registered under the Factories Act, 1948 or not possessing a driving license. It was held that by virtue of having served on the post for a long time, by extending equitable consideration, the appointments made pursuant to a selection were not liable to be disturbed. The relevant portion is reproduced below for ready reference: – “6. The selected candidates, who have been appointed, are now in employment as Motor Vehicle Inspectors for over a decade. Now that they have worked in such posts for a long time, necessarily they would have acquired the requisite experience. Lack of experience, if any, at the time of recruitment is made good now. Therefore, the new exercise ordered by the High Court will only lead to anomalous results. Since we are disposing of these matters on equitable consideration, the learned counsel for the contesting respondents submitted that their cases for appointment should also be considered. It is not clear whether there is any vacancy for the post of Motor Vehicle Inspectors. If that is so, unless any one or more of the selected candidates are displaced, the cases of the contesting respondents cannot be considered. We think that such adjustment is not feasible for practical reasons. We have extended equitable considerations HARSHA RANI 2026.07.29 11:44 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document LPA-893-2025 and connected matters 8 to such selected candidates who have worked in the post for a long period, but the contesting respondents do not come in that class. The effect of our conclusion is that appointments made long back pursuant to a selection need not be disturbed. Such a view can be derived from several decisions of this Court including the decisions in Ram Sarup v. State of Haryana; District Collector Chairman, Vizianagaram Social Welfare Residential School Society v. M. Tripura Sundari Devi and H.C. Puttaswamy v. Hon'ble Chief Justice of Karnataka High Court, Bangalore. Therefore, we must let the matters lie where they are.” 11. It was further urged by the learned Senior Counsel for the appellants that such equitable consideration was extended by this Court in a catena of cases, being  Bholanath Mukherjee and Ors. v. Ramakrishna Mission Vivekananda Centenary College and Ors. , Rajesh Kumar and Ors. v. State of Bihar and Ors. and Vikas Pratap Singh and Ors. v. State of Chhattisgarh and Ors.  to contend that where candidates have continued in service for a considerable period, this Court may, in appropriate cases, mould the relief on equitable considerations so as to avoid unsettling appointments. 12. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that they have no objection in case the private respondents (writ petitioners) are adjusted without even disturbing the appellants as they are only interested to get appointment rather than disturbing the appointment of the appellants already made. 13. Learned counsel for the respondents-Nigam, on instructions from Mr. Ravinder Singh, AEE, HVPNL, Ms. Jyoti Singhal, Deputy HARSHA RANI 2026.07.29 11:44 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document LPA-893-2025 and connected matters 9 Superintendent, UHBVNL and Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Deputy Superintendent, DHBVN, submits that though, appellants have been informed that the vacancies are there but, there is no instructions whether the respondent- Nigam will on their own adjust the appellants so as to solve the issue raised before this Court. 14. Learned counsel for respondents-Nigam further submits that in case any direction is given by this Court, the same will be complied with. 15. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record with their able assistance. 16. A perusal of the judgment dated 18.02.2025 passed by the learned Single Judge would show that the criteria was framed by the respondent-Haryana Staff Selection Commission in which, keeping in view the terms and conditions, the interpretation achieved was that the candidates can bring their certificate to seek eligibility and marks even upto the time of scrutiny of the documents. 17. Even in the present appeal, an affidavit has been filed that the Commission was of the view that the candidates are required to bring their actual experience certificate to get the weightage at the time of scrutiny of the documents and not to attach the same with the application form, though the learned Single Judge has opined otherwise. 18. That being so, the candidates who have been selected, have been selected keeping in view the interpretation and terms and conditions of the advertisement by the selection authority, they are not at fault either of any misconduct or misleading any authority so as to seek selection and consequent appointment. Hence, even if the learned Single Judge has come HARSHA RANI 2026.07.29 11:44 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document LPA-893-2025 and connected matters 10 to the conclusion that the process/interpretation of the clauses of the advertisement dated 20.02.2016 have wrongly been implemented by the recruiting agency, the solution should be that the minimum loss is caused either to the selected candidates or to the candidates who are seeking a particular interpretation of the clauses which has been upheld by the learned Single Judge. 19. Further, as per the facts which have been brought on record, the appellants are working for a period of more than seven years. At this stage, they have already become over-aged and have no other avenue to seek a Government appointment in case they are thrown out at this stage. Their career will come to an end though, they are not at fault in any manner either to prescribe or to interpret the terms and conditions of the advertisement which has only been done by the recruiting agency hence, when the candidates who have not only been selected but has cleared their probation and are working for the last seven years, sincere efforts should be made to adjust them in order to achieve the purpose for which the writ petitions were filed. 20. It may be noticed that the writ petitions were filed in order to secure the appointment and not to oust the selected candidates in case the same is possible. The settled principles of law under these kinds of facts are that the selected candidates should be allowed to continue in case the vacancy exist with the employer. 21. To support the said view, reliance is placed upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India rendered in Civil Appeal Nos. 5318– HARSHA RANI 2026.07.29 11:44 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document LPA-893-2025 and connected matters 11 5319 of 2012 titled Vikash Pratap Singh and others vs. State of Chhattisgarh and others, decided on 09.07.2013. The relevant paragraphs of the said judgment are as under:- “26. In Buddhi Nath Chaudhary and Ors. v. Akhil Kumar and Ors., (2001) 2 SCR 18, even though the appointments were held to be improper, this Court did not disturb the appointments on the ground that the incumbents had worked for several years and had gained experience and observed: "We have extended equitable considerations to such selected candidates who have worked on the posts for a long period XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX 28. In our considered view, the appellants have successfully undergone training and are efficiently serving the respondent-State for more than three years and undoubtedly their termination would not only impinge upon the economic security of the appellants and their dependants but also adversely affect their careers. This would be highly unjust and grossly unfair to the appellants who are innocent appointees of an erroneous evaluation of the answer scripts. However, their continuation in service should neither give any unfair advantage to the appellants nor cause undue prejudice to the candidates selected qua the revised merit list. 29. Accordingly, we direct the respondent-State to appoint the appellants in the revised merit list placing them at the bottom of the said list. The candidates who have crossed the minimum statutory age for appointment shall be accommodated with suitable age relaxation.” 22. Further reliance may be placed on the judgment rendered by this Court in CWP No.12835 of 2012 titled as Sahil Aggarwal vs. State of HARSHA RANI 2026.07.29 11:44 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document LPA-893-2025 and connected matters 12 Punjab and others, decided on 26.04.2014. The relevant paragraphs of the said judgment are as under:- “RELIEF (1) For the reasons stated above, it is held that selection and appointment of the candidates, who were appointed on the basis of evaluation of the answer sheets at the first time, who do not find place in the revised merit list, does not deserve to be set aside. Ordered accordingly. (2) The petitioners, who have secured more marks than the last appointed candidate either in the process of selection in the first round or the second round be offered appointment. The needful be done within a period of two months from the date of receipt of copy of the order. It is made clear that they shall be entitled to all the benefits from the date they join the service.” 23. The question which arises is whether on the basis of such law, the appellants can be adjusted and even the respondents who have been successful before the learned Single Judge can be given relief which is ever seeking i.e. selection and appointment. 24. It may be noticed that the selection was finalized in the year 2019 and only 29 candidates raised a grievance with regard to the interpretation of the terms and conditions of the advertisement dated 20.02.2016. 25. The question which arises is whether the petitioners who had raised the grievance immediately at the time of the finalization of the selection can be accommodated or not. 26. As mentioned earlier, learned counsel for the respndent- HVPNL submits that as of now there are 48 vacancies which are lying HARSHA RANI 2026.07.29 11:44 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document LPA-893-2025 and connected matters 13 vacant. 27. Keeping in view the exceptional circumstances of the present case where the selected candidates are not at fault and the writ petitioners have also succeeded, writ petitioners should be adjusted against such 48 posts. Hence, keeping in view the settled principle of law noticed hereinbefore, it is directed that all the writ petitioners who were before the learned Single Judge, will be considered for appointment against such 48 posts. 28. It may be noticed that this will be irrespective of the fact whether such petitioner has applied for a vacancy against HVPNL or not. The said candidates will be considered as eligible to be appointed against such 48 posts which are lying vacant with the HVPNL. However, their eligibility to compete for the selection will be adjudicated by the HVPNL before giving them the appointment order. The eligibility is qua the essential qualification to be possessed by the candidate concerned. 29. The question which arises is as to how to compensate the writ petitioners as the selection was made in the year 2019. 30. It may be noticed that the writ petitioners have agreed that notional appointment will be given to them from the date the other candidates of the same selection were appointed. However, said appointment will be given on notional basis and actual salary will only be given from the date of the actual appointment orders are issued and in pursuance to the same candidates joined. 31. Keeping in view the above, the present appeals are disposed of in the terms mentioned hereinbefore. Let the appointment to the writ HARSHA RANI 2026.07.29 11:44 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document LPA-893-2025 and connected matters 14 petitioners be issued by the respondent-HVPNL within a period of three months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. 32. Civil miscellaneous application pending if any, also stands disposed of. 33. A photocopy of this order be placed on the file of other connected cases. (HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI) JUDGE July 22, 2026 (AMARINDER SINGH GREWAL) harsha JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes Whether reportable : No HARSHA RANI 2026.07.29 11:44 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document