120 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-21360-2026 Date of decision: 16.07.2026 Hitender Yadav ....Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARPREET SINGH BRAR Present: Mr. Laxman Choudhary, 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 grant the benefit of ACP on completion of 08 years of satisfactory service w.e.f. 01.12.2020 which is pending before the respondents since 15.03.2023 (Annexure P-7). Further, for directing respondent No.1 to decide the ACP case as well as pay protection matter which is pending before the respondents even when the similarly situated employees who approached this Court vide Annexures P-13 & P-14, their pay has already been protected and the same benefit has been granted by respondent No.1 vide orders dated 19.07.2024 and 17.09.2025 (Annexures P-15 & P-16, respectively). 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner inter alia contends that vide Annexure P-5, the case of the petitioner regarding pay protection has been forwarded to the concerned Block Education Officer by the Principal of the NEHA 2026.07.16 16:06 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh CWP-21360-2026 -2- School on 25.08.2023 and in spite of passing of more than three years, the admissible benefits including ACP have not been granted to the petitioner. 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.2. 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.2 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.2. (HARPREET SINGH BRAR) JUDGE 16.07.2026 Neha Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No NEHA 2026.07.16 16:06 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh