-1- CWP-17412-2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 104 CWP-17412-2026 Date of Decision: 10.07.2026 Bijender .....Petitioner VERSUS State of Haryana and others …..Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARPREET SINGH BRAR Present : Mr. Tejpal Dhull, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Naveen Singh Panwar, DAG, Haryana. ***** HARPREET SINGH BRAR, J. 1. The present writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the action of respondent No.2 not to allow the petitioner to join on the post of TGT Social Studies and further to quash the action of the respondents not to take final decision upon letter dated 26.06.2025 (Annexure P11) pending before the respondents. Further, prayer has been made to issue a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent-department to allow the petitioner to join on the post of TGT Social Studies pursuant to his appointment letter dated 13.12.2024 (Annexure P24) and to issue directions to the respondents to decide the case of the petitioner for joining on the post of TGT Social Studies. 2. On 27.05.2026, this Court passed the following order:- “It is inter alia contended that the petitioner was offered appointment to the post of TGT Social Studies vide order dated 13.12.2024, Annexure P-4, but was not permitted to join since there was an interim order passed by this Court dated OMKAR SINGH 2026.07.15 09:48 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court, Chandigarh -2- CWP-17412-2026 07.04.2025 in CWP-29139-2024 and connected matters, restraining the respondents from giving appointment to the candidates. These cases have been finally disposed of vide order dated 27.10.2025, Annexure P-10, but the petitioner has still not been permitted to join. The concerned Deputy District Elementary Education Officer sought permission for their joining vide letter dated 26.06.2025, Annexure P-11, but no action has been taken on that as well. 2. Learned State counsel seeks an adjournment to get instructions in that regard. 3. Adjourned to 10.07.2026.” 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner also emphasizes on the fact that the petitioner was amongst the selected candidates in the result declared initially and even in the revised result, the petitioner was one of the selected candidates. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the present writ petition may be treated as a comprehensive representation and a direction be issued to respondent No.2/competent authority to consider and decide the claim of the petitioner by passing a reasoned and speaking order, within a stipulated period, in the light of the judgments rendered by this Court in CWP No.21993 of 2023 on 01.08.2024 titled as Satish Khurana v. State of Haryana and others and CWP No.27283 of 2023 on 22.12.2025 titled as Ravinder Singh v. Haryana State Industrial and Infrastructure Development Corporation Limited and others, after affording an adequate opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, in accordance with law. OMKAR SINGH 2026.07.15 09:48 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court, Chandigarh -3- CWP-17412-2026 4. Learned State counsel is not able to controvert the fact that the petitioner is amongst the selected candidates and even in the list vide which the revised result was declared, the petitioner’s name was found mentioned. Further, he does not able to distinguish the case of the petitioner from Satish Khurana’s case (supra) and Ravinder Singh’s case (supra). Learned State counsel has no objection in case a direction is issued to respondent No.2/competent authority to consider and decide the claim of the petitioner by passing a reasoned and speaking order in accordance with law. 5. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case as well as the stand taken by learned State counsel, the present petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No.2 to treat the present writ petition as a comprehensive representation and to consider and decide the claim of the petitioner by passing a reasoned and speaking order, in accordance with law, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order keeping in view the judgments rendered by this Court in Satish Khurana’s case (supra) and Ravinder Singh’s case (supra) and allow the petitioner to join on the post of TGT Social Studies as per the final result dated 27.07.2024 without being influenced by the interim order dated 10.07.2026 passed by this Court in CWP No.20614 of 2026 titled as Savita and others v. State of Haryana and others. 6. The petitioner, if otherwise found eligible, shall be entitled to notional benefits and grant of seniority at par with his counterparts, subject to fulfillment of all other eligibility conditions as prescribed under the relevant rules. OMKAR SINGH 2026.07.15 09:48 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court, Chandigarh -4- CWP-17412-2026 7. It is made clear that in the event respondent No.2 fails to comply with the aforesaid directions within the stipulated period, the petitioner shall also be at liberty to avail appropriate remedies available in law, including initiation of contempt under Article 215 of the Constitution of India for willful disobedience of the present order. ( HARPREET SINGH BRAR ) July 10 , 2026. JUDGE ‘om’ Whether speaking/reasoned. : Yes/No Whether Reportable. : Yes/No OMKAR SINGH 2026.07.15 09:48 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court, Chandigarh