LACHHMAN SINGH AND OTHERS v. STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS
CWP/18515/2026 · 2026-07-14
Harpreet Singh Brar
Civil Appealbody2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 30780 (PNJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 30780 (PNJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
CWP-18515-2026
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 121
CWP-18515-2026 Date of decision: 14.07.2026
Lachhman Singh and others ....Petitioners
Versus
State of Haryana and others ....Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARPREET SINGH BRAR
Present: Mr. S.K. Malik, Advocate for the petitioners.
Mr. Rahul Dev Singh, Addl. AG Haryana.
HARPREET SINGH BRAR J. (Oral)
1.
Prayer in this writ petition filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, is for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus, to consider the claim of petitioners for regularization on completion of around 12 to 15 years of continuous service in view of the
judgment passed by Hon’ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No.14831- 2024, Jaggo Versus Union of India, decided on 20.12.2024 (Annexure P-3) and also granting them all consequential benefits i.e. seniority, pay fixation and arrears of salary w.e.f. date of joining and Civil Appeal No.8158-7179-2024, Shripal and another Versus Nagar Nigam Ghaziabad on 31.01.2025 (Annexure P-4) where non regularization of service has been considered as arbitrary and illegal.
PUNEET CHAWLA 2026.07.15 14:54 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
CWP-18515-2026
2
2.
Learned counsel for the petitioners, inter alia, contends that the petitioners have continuously worked with the respondents for a period ranging from 12 to 14 years without any break in service and have rendered satisfactory service throughout without any complaint whatso- ever. It is submitted that the duties discharged by the petitioners are perennial and continuous in nature and are essential for the day-to-day functioning of the respondent-Department. Learned counsel further submits that the representation/legal notice dated 25.12.2025 (Annexure P-9), submitted by the petitioners through their counsel, deserves to be considered by the competent authority in the light of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Secretary, State of Karnataka and others Versus Uma Devi (3) and others, (2006) 4 SCC 1; Jaggo and others Versus Union of India and others, Civil Appeal No.14831 of 2024, decided on 20.12.2024; and Shripal and another Versus Nagar Nigam Ghaziabad and others, Civil Appeal Nos.8158-8179 of 2024, decided on 31.01.2025. At this stage, learned counsel submits that the petitioners would be satisfied if a direction is issued to the respondents/competent authority to consider and decide the notice dated 25.12.2025 (Annexure P-9) in the light of the aforesaid judgments by passing a reasoned and speaking order within a time-bound period. 3. On advance notice, learned State Counsel submits that he has no objection if a direction is issued to the respondents/competent authority to consider and decide the notice dated 25.12.2025 (Annexure P-9) by passing a reasoned and speaking order, in accordance with law, keeping in view the aforesaid judgments, within a stipulated period. PUNEET CHAWLA 2026.07.15 14:54 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
CWP-18515-2026
3
4. In view of the limited prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioners and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the controversy, the present writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents No.3 and 4/competent authority to consider and decide the notice dated 25.12.2025 (Annexure P-9) by passing a reasoned and speak- ing order, in accordance with law, keeping in view the principles laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Uma Devi, Jaggo and Shripal (supra), within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. The decision so taken shall also be commu- nicated to the petitioners forthwith. 5.
Needless to say, if upon consideration of their claim the petitioners are found entitled to the relief sought, the consequential benefits shall also be extended to them forthwith, in accordance with law. 6. Pending miscellaneous application, if any, also stands
disposed of.
(HARPREET SINGH BRAR)
JUDGE 14.07.2026 P.C
Whether speaking/reasoned:
Yes/No
Whether reportable:
Yes/No
PUNEET CHAWLA 2026.07.15 14:54 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document