Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Punjab and Haryana · body

2026 DAILYLAW 30682 (PNJ)

RAM PAL v. STATE OF PUNJAB THROUGH SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT

CWP/21310/2026 · 2026-07-16

Sandeep Moudgil

Transfer Petitionbody2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

119 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-21310-2026 DECIDED ON:16.07.2026 RAM PAL .....PETITIONER(S) VERSUS STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS .....RESPONDENT(S) CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MOUDGIL Present: Ms. Harmanjot Kaur, Advocate and Mr. V.S. Mahal Advocate for the petitioner. SANDEEP MOUDGIL, J (ORAL) 1. The jurisdiction of this Court has been invoked under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India for Issuance of a Writ in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondents consider the Representation dated 26.11.2025 at Annexure P-2 and further to regularize the services of the petitioner who are working as daily wager/ work charge employee with respondents on daily wage in pursuance to the policy dated 18.03.2011 at Annexure P-1 and policy issued dated 16.05.2023 at Annexure P-2 and to pay Petitioner minimum of pay scale plus dearness allowance plus grade pay along with arrears in lieu of the judgment of this Court in CWP No. 19238 of 2013 titled as Amrish Sharma & Ors. Vs. State of Punjab & Ors. & Judgment of Supreme Court in 'State of Punjab v Jagjit Singh (2017) 1 SCC 148' from the day the Petitioner has completed his 10 years of service with Respondents. MEENU 2026.07.17 14:11 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-21310-2026 -2- 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he will be satisfied in case a direction be issued to the respondent/State to decide the representation dated 26.11.2025 (Annexure P-3). 3. Notice of motion. 4. Mr. TPS Walia, AAG Punjab, having served with an advance copy of the petition, has put in appearance on behalf of respondent/State and assures the Court that the above-said representation will be decided within time bound manner. 5. Without commenting upon the merits of the case, respondent No. 2 – The Principal Chief Conservator of Forests, Punjab, is directed to consider and decide the representation dated 26.11.2025 (Annexure P-3) in accordance with law, keeping in view the policy instructions dated 18.03.2011 and 16.05.2023 (Annexures P-1 and P-2), the judgment of this Court in CWP No. 19238 of 2013, Amrish Sharma & Others v. State of Punjab & Others, and the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of Punjab v. Jagjit Singh, (2017) 1 SCC 148, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and by passing a speaking order within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. A copy of the speaking order shall be supplied to the petitioner within one week thereafter. 6. The petition in the aforesaid terms stands disposed off. (SANDEEP MOUDGIL) 16.07.2026 JUDGE Meenu Whether speaking/reasoned :Yes/No Whether reportable :Yes/No MEENU 2026.07.17 14:11 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document