139 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-19929-2026 Date of decision: 06.07.2026 Harish ....Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARPREET SINGH BRAR Present: Mr. Digvijay Singh, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Naveen Singh Panwar, DAG, Haryana. HARPREET SINGH BRAR, J. (ORAL) 1. The present civil writ petition has been filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to correct or change the designation of the petitioner from Chowkidar to Library Attendant on which the petitioner was already working before porting in Haryana Kaushal Rozgar Nigam Ltd. i.e. respondent No.4. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner inter alia contends that the petitioner was appointed as Group ‘D’ (Multi Skill Worker) and worked as Library Attendant. The petitioner is still serving as a Library Attendant. The salary bills of the petitioner (Annexures P-3 to P-10) clearly reflect that the petitioner has been performing the duties of Library Attendant. After, the petitioner’s service was ported to HKRN portal, a deployment letter 01.04.2022 (Annexure P-11) was issued in which his designation has been wrongly mentioned as Chowkidar despite the fact that the petitioner is working as a Library Attendant. Respondent No.3 -College requested respondent No.2 vide letter dated 08.01.2026 (Annexure P-12) to correct the designation of the petitioner from Chowkidar to Library Attendant. The petitioner also raised his grievance on the portal on 17.01.2026 (Annexure P-13) which has been turned down on hyper technical ground that no change can be affected at this stage. NEHA 2026.07.06 18:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh CWP-19929-2026 -2- 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has limited his prayer to the extent that the present petition be treated as a comprehensive representation and the same be decided in a time bound manner by passing a speaking order after affording the petitioner an opportunity of being heard. 4. Notice of motion. 5. Mr. Naveen Singh Panwar, DAG, Haryana puts in appearance and accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State and submits that the grievance raised by the petitioner in the present writ petition would be considered by passing a speaking order in accordance with the law by respondent No.4/competent authority. 6. Therefore, in view of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties, the present writ petition is disposed of and the respondent No.4/competent authority is directed to treat this writ petition as a comprehensive representation and consider the claim 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 respondent No.4/competent authority. 7. Any deviation from the direction issued by this Court, entitles the petitioner to move an appropriate application under Article 215 of Cr.P.C. of the Constitution of India to initiate contempt of Court proceedings. (HARPREET SINGH BRAR) JUDGE 06.07.2026 Neha Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No NEHA 2026.07.06 18:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh