207 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** CWP-8316-2016 (O&M) Date of Decision: 24.07.2025 Urwashi Koul ...Petitioner Vs. Chandigarh Housing Board and Others ...Respondents And Sr. No. Case No. Petitioner(s) Respondent(s) 2. CWP-10283-2016 (O&M) Anjana Jindal Chandigarh Housing Board and Others 3. CWP-8311-2016 Rakesh Garg Chandigarh Housing Board and Others CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGMOHAN BANSAL Present:- Mr. D.S. Patwalia, Senior Advocate with Ms. Sehar Navjeet Singh Sandhu, Advocate for the petitioner in CWP-8316-2016. Mr. Rajinder Kumar Singla, Advocate for the petitioner in CWP-8311-2016. Mr. Vaneet Soni, Advocate for the petitioner in CWP-10283-2016. Mr. Parveen Chauhan, Advocate for Mr. Gagandeep Singh Wasu, Advocate for the respondent-Chandigarh Housing Board. JAGMOHAN BANSAL, J. (ORAL) 1. As common issues are involved in the captioned petitions, with the consent of both sides, the same are hereby disposed of by this common order. For the sake of brevity and convenience, facts are borrowed from CWP-8316-2016. PRINCE CHAWLA 2025.07.25 09:43 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-8316-2016 (O&M) and other connected cases -2- 2. The petitioner through instant petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India is seeking setting aside of order dated 31.03.2016 whereby she was ordered to retire at the age of 50 years. 3. The petitioner continued to work despite aforesaid order on account of interim order dated 27.06.2016 passed by this Court. 4. Learned counsel representing the petitioner(s) submits that petitioner attained age of superannuation i.e. 58 years in April’ 2024, however, on account of adoption of Central Government Rules, the petitioner is permitted to continue beyond 58 years and she would retire in April’ 2026. 5. Mr. Parveen Chauhan, Advocate expressed his inability to controvert the aforesaid factual and legal position. 6. The impugned order was passed in 2016 and petitioner is still in service and going to attain age of superannuation in April’ 2026. This Court, at this stage, does not find it appropriate to return the findings on merits. It would be in the interest of justice if interim order is made absolute. 7. Accordingly, the interim order is hereby made absolute. 8. Disposed of. 9. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. (JAGMOHAN BANSAL) JUDGE 24.07.2025 Prince Chawla Whether Speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether Reportable: Yes/No PRINCE CHAWLA 2025.07.25 09:43 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document