IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 225 CWP-4353-2023O&M) Date of Decision:- 13.07 .2026 Rajinder Parsad … PeƟƟoner Versus State of Haryana and others ... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA Present:- Mr. Akash Kundu, Advocate for the peƟƟoner. Mr. Neeraj Gupta, Addl. Aag, Haryana. ***** NIDHI GUPTA, J . Present Civil Writ PeƟƟon under ArƟcles 226 of the ConsƟtuƟon of India has been filed by the peƟƟoner for issuance of a writ in the nature of CerƟorari for quashing the order/direcƟon dated 24.09.2015 (Annexure P-2) issued by respondent No.2 and direct the respondents to grant the peƟƟoner the pending increments, ACP benefits and all consequenƟal benefits in terms of leƩer dated 22.12.2020 (Annexure P-6). 2. It is inter alia submiƩed by learned counsel for the peƟƟoner that the peƟƟoner was iniƟally appointed as a Peon on 18.10.1982 in the office of Assistant Registrar, Narwana. Vide order dated 14.02.2012, peƟƟoner was promoted to the post of Clerk. It is submiƩed that as per the order of promoƟon, there was a condiƟon precedent that peƟƟoner was required to pass NEELAM KUMARI 2026.07.15 12:11 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh CWP-4353-2023 (O&M) - 2 - the typing test of either English or Hindi within one year, and that if the same is not complied with, the Annual Increment/Increments will be stopped. As the peƟƟoner was of old age, being 48 years, peƟƟoner made a representaƟon dated 27.05.2015, (Annexure P-1), to respondent No.2 praying for exempƟon from passing the typing test due to his old age. However, vide the impugned order dated 24.09.2015 (Annexure P-2), request of the peƟƟoner has been rejected. Accordingly, peƟƟoner has appealed to the AddiƟonal Chief Secretary, CooperaƟon Department, Haryana, vide Annexure P-3. 3. It is submiƩed that in a similar maƩer i.e. CWP-11842-2020 dated 24.09.2020 Ɵtled as Surinder Singh and others versus State of Haryana and others, this Court had issued direcƟons, to the effect that “those who were promoted aŌer 07.11.2013 had to clear the SETC and that 10 chances will be provided for the same.” It is submiƩed that pursuant to the above direcƟon of this Court, Government of Haryana had issued a leƩer dated 22.12.2020 (Annexure P-6) direcƟng that “the condiƟon for imposing SETC shall not be imposed upon the Clerks/Steno-typists who were iniƟally appointed/recruited as such on or before 07.11.2013.” It is submiƩed that a similar relaxaƟon also ought to be given to the peƟƟoner. 4. Ld. counsel further contends that the peƟƟoner has reƟred from his post of Clerk on superannuaƟon on 02.01.2022. However, he has not yet received the benefits that he is enƟtled to as per Annexure P-6. It is accordingly prayed “to issue a writ in the nature of CERTIORARI by calling for the records and quashing order/direcƟon dated 24.09.2015 (Annexure P-2) issued by respondent No.2, whereby respondent No.2 has rejected the prayer of the peƟƟoner to grant NEELAM KUMARI 2026.07.15 12:11 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh CWP-4353-2023 (O&M) - 3 - exempƟon from passing the typing test, the said order being, inter alia, without jurisdicƟon, illegal, arbitrary and misconceived; issue a writ in the nature of MANDAMUS, direcƟng the official respondents to not take any steps/acƟons and/or carry out any proceedings and/or pass any orders, pursuant to and/or in respect of leƩer dated 22.12.2020 (Annexure P-6).” 5. Per contra, ld. counsel for the State has vehemently opposed submissions advanced on behalf of the peƟƟoner and contended that peƟƟoner is not enƟtled to the benefits as prayed for as peƟƟoner had failed to pass the typing test which is a mandatory condiƟon. It is submiƩed that, therefore, there is no merit to the present writ peƟƟon and the same deserves to be dismissed. 6. No other argument is made on behalf of ld. counsel for the parƟes. I have heard ld. counsel and perused the case file and record in detail. 7. I find merit in the submissions advanced on behalf of the respondent-State. Vide the present Writ PeƟƟon, the peƟƟoner has sought seƫng aside of order dated 24.09.2015 (Annexure P-2), passed by respondent No.3-Registrar, CooperaƟve SocieƟes, Haryana, whereby claim of the peƟƟoner for grant of ACP and other benefits, has been rejected. The peƟƟoner has further prayed for direcƟng the respondents to grant pending Increments, ACP benefits, and other consequenƟal benefits as per leƩer dated 22.12.2020 (Annexure P-6). 8. It is not disputed that peƟƟoner was promoted to the post of Clerk vide leƩer dated 14.02.2012. AdmiƩedly, a mandatory condiƟon contained in leƩer of promoƟon was that peƟƟoner has to pass the typing test of either English or Hindi within one year; and that if the said condiƟon is not complied NEELAM KUMARI 2026.07.15 12:11 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh CWP-4353-2023 (O&M) - 4 - with, the Annual Increment/Increments shall be stopped. AdmiƩedly, peƟƟoner has not fulfilled the said condiƟon. Therefore, he is not enƟtled to the said benefits. 9. Even as per Appendix B of the relevant Service Rules applicable to the peƟƟoner, it is sƟpulated as follows: - 10. AdmiƩedly, peƟƟoner does not saƟsfy the said condiƟon. As such, he cannot claim the benefit of increment etc. 11. Further, peƟƟoner has relied upon the leƩer dated 22.12.2020 (Annexure P-6), Clause 3(a) to submit that condiƟon of SETC shall not be imposed on Cerks/Steno-typists who were iniƟally appointed/recruited on or before 07.11.2013. However, Clause 3(b) of the said leƩer dated 22.12.2020, (Annexure P-6), sƟpulates as follows:- NEELAM KUMARI 2026.07.15 12:11 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh CWP-4353-2023 (O&M) - 5 - “(b) The Clerks/Steno-Typists iniƟally appointed/recruited on or before 07.11.2013 shall pass the Type Test as prescribed in their Service Rules and they shall be allowed all benefits including pending increments, promoƟons on seniority-cum merit basis and ACP benefits.” 12. As promoƟon of the peƟƟoner is on dated 14.02.2012 i.e. prior to 07.11.2013, thus, even under the above said leƩer, it is incumbent upon the peƟƟoner to have passed the typing test to avail the benefit of Annual Increment/Increments. It is further informed by learned State counsel that the SETC has also been withdrawn by the respondents. 13. Further, even as per following Rule 8(b) of Haryana Civil Services (ACP Rules), 2016, the peƟƟoner is not enƟtled for ACP without qualifying the type test:- “8. Other general condiƟons of eligibiliƟes of ACP Level. The following general condiƟons shall also be fulfilled by a Government employee for availing benefit of ACP Level :- a)xxxxxxxxx (b) if such promoƟon involved passing of any departmental or other test, acquisiƟon of higher educaƟonal qualificaƟon, etc., such condiƟon shall also be fulfilled by the Government employee.” 14. Before parƟng, it may also be pointed out that the peƟƟoner was condiƟonally promoted vide order dated 14.02.2012. Three years thereinaŌer, peƟƟoner made the representaƟon dated 27.05.2015 (Annexure P-1) seeking exempƟon from the condiƟon of passing typing test only on the ground that he was aged, being 48 years; and the present Writ PeƟƟon has been filed eight years thereinaŌer on 23.02.2023. Thus, claim of the peƟƟoner is highly belated. NEELAM KUMARI 2026.07.15 12:11 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh CWP-4353-2023 (O&M) - 6 - Instead of fulfilling the said condiƟon, it is only aŌer more than three years of his promoƟon, peƟƟoner had submiƩed representaƟon dated 27.05.2015 (Annexure P-1) seeking relaxaƟon from passing of typing test. ConsequenƟally, the same came to be rightly rejected vide impugned order 11.08.2015 (Annexure P-2). 15. Moreover, pursuant to promoƟon order dated 14.02.2012, peƟƟoner had duly joined on 15.02.2012, thereby implying that peƟƟoner had acceded to the said condiƟon of passing typing test. Resultantly, peƟƟoner is now estopped from laying challenge to the said condiƟon. 16. In view of the above noted posiƟon, there is no merit in the present writ peƟƟon, and the same is accordingly, dismissed. 17. Pending applicaƟon(s), if any, also stands disposed of. ( NIDHI GUPTA ) 13.07.2026 JUDGE Neelam Whether speaking /reasoned Yes / No Whether Reportable Yes / No NEELAM KUMARI 2026.07.15 12:11 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh