IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA (106) Har Lal State of Haryana & another CORAM : Present: HARPREET SINGH BRAR 1. Constitution of India is for issuance of directing Engineer (Horticulture) w.e.f. 07.12.2015 i.e. the date on which he became fully eligible and competent, b held Current Duty Charge of Sub view of the provisions of “The Haryana Urban Development Authority Services Regulations, 1989 (as amended from time to time) along with all consequential benefits and particularly in the light of judgment dated 29.11.2021 p Vs. State of Haryana & another” vide judgment dated 01.12.2024 and further upheld by the Hon’ble Supreme Court 22.01.2025 (Annexure P “Chief Administrator Vs. Naurty Ram & another.” IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Versus State of Haryana & another CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE HARPREET SINGH BRAR Mr.Ravinder Malik (Ravi), Advocate, for the petitioner (s). Mr.Vikrant Pamboo, Addl.A.G., Haryana. ARPREET SINGH BRAR, J. (Oral) The prayer in the present petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India is for issuance of the respondents to promote the petitioner to the post of Executive Engineer (Horticulture) w.e.f. 07.12.2015 i.e. the date on which he became fully eligible and competent, by counting his experience for the period he held Current Duty Charge of Sub-Divisi view of the provisions of “The Haryana Urban Development Authority Services Regulations, 1989 (as amended from time to time) along with all consequential benefits and particularly in the light of judgment dated 021 passed by this Court in CWP Vs. State of Haryana & another” upheld by Division Bench of this Court vide judgment dated 01.12.2024 (Annexure P and further upheld by the Hon’ble Supreme Court 22.01.2025 (Annexure P-12) passed in SLP(Civil) No.9638 “Chief Administrator Vs. Naurty Ram & another.” IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-26345-2025 Decided on : 05.09.2025 ……Petitioner(s) Versus ……Respondent(s) HARPREET SINGH BRAR Mr.Ravinder Malik (Ravi), Advocate, for the petitioner (s). Mr.Vikrant Pamboo, Addl.A.G., Haryana. The prayer in the present petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India is for issuance of Writ in the nature of Mandamus the respondents to promote the petitioner to the post of Executive Engineer (Horticulture) w.e.f. 07.12.2015 i.e. the date on which he became counting his experience for the period he Divisional Engineer (Horticulture), in view of the provisions of “The Haryana Urban Development Authority Services Regulations, 1989 (as amended from time to time) along with all consequential benefits and particularly in the light of judgment dated CWP-13513-2020 titled “Naurty Ram upheld by Division Bench of this Court (Annexure P-11) passed in LPA-897-2022 and further upheld by the Hon’ble Supreme Court vide order dated SLP(Civil) No.9638-2024 titled as “Chief Administrator Vs. Naurty Ram & another.” ……Petitioner(s) ……Respondent(s) The prayer in the present petition under Articles 226/227 of the Writ in the nature of Mandamus the respondents to promote the petitioner to the post of Executive Engineer (Horticulture) w.e.f. 07.12.2015 i.e. the date on which he became counting his experience for the period he onal Engineer (Horticulture), in view of the provisions of “The Haryana Urban Development Authority Services Regulations, 1989 (as amended from time to time) along with all consequential benefits and particularly in the light of judgment dated “Naurty Ram upheld by Division Bench of this Court 2022 dated titled as SAILESH RANJAN 2025.09.08 11:22 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-26345-2025 -2- 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he would be satisfied if the representation dated 06.03.2025 (Annexure P-13) of the petitioner is decided by respondent No.2 by passing a speaking order in a time bound manner. 3. Learned State counsel, appearing on advanced notice, submits that he has no objection in case a direction is issued to respondent No.2 for time-bound consideration and decision of the dated 06.03.2025 (Annexure P-13) of the petitioner by passing a speaking order. 4. Therefore, in view of the limited prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner, the respondent No.2 is directed to consider the representation dated 06.03.2025 (Annexure P-13) of the petitioner and pass a speaking order, after affording him an opportunity to be heard, within a period of 03 months from the date of receiving a certified copy of this order. Further, the decision taken thereof shall be conveyed to the petitioner. Needless to say, if the petitioner is found entitled to the relief sought, the same shall be granted forthwith by the respondent. 5. Disposed of, accordingly. 05.09.2025 (HARPREET SINGH BRAR) Sailesh JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether Reportable : Yes/No SAILESH RANJAN 2025.09.08 11:22 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document