111 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-21974-2025 Date of Decision :22.08.2025 Poonam …Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and others ….Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA Present: Mr. Parveen Moudgil, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Tanushree Gupta, Senior Deputy Advocate General, Haryana. TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA, J. (ORAL) The petition has been filed, inter alia, seeking a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to consider the petitioner as eligible Extension Lecturer despite pendency of verification of her degree before the Anti- Corruption Bureau. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance upon the case of similarly placed Extension Lecturers, who have been considered eligible despite the pending enquiry and have been given pay scale meant for eligible Extension Lecturers, vide memo dated 28.05.2025, Annexure P-10. 3. Learned State counsel has received instructions from the second respondent/Director Higher Education, vide memo dated 22.08.2025, which is retained on the case file as Annexure ‘A’. Relying upon the same, she contends that the Department is in process of taking a uniform decision applicable to all Extension Lecturers like the petitioner. As per the outcome, and in accordance herewith, the petitioner’s case will also be considered. PUSHPINDER SAINI 2025.08.27 16:11 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-21974-2025 -2- 4. In view of the statement, the petition is disposed of directing the first and the second respondent to take a final decision in the matter and consider the petitioner’s case in terms therewith, within a period of three months. (TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA) August 22, 2025 JUDGE ps Whether speaking/ reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No PUSHPINDER SAINI 2025.08.27 16:11 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document