CWP-21199-2026 (O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH (132) CWP-21199-2026 (O&M) Date of Decision : 15.07.2026 Chandigarh Administration and another ...Petitioners Versus Gurcharan Singh and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMARINDER SINGH GREWAL Present: Mr. Gaurav Rana, Advocate and Ms. Sukhmani Tiwana, Advocate for the petitioners. *** Harsimran Singh Sethi, J. (Oral) 1. In the present petition, the challenge is to the order passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Tribunal’) dated 06.02.2025 in OA No. 060/01554/2017 (Annexure P-1) by which a direction has been given that the service rendered by the respondents in an earlier Organization as JBT Teacher in the pay scale of Rs. 4500 – 125- 700 in the Government Aided Institution prior to appointment with Chandigarh Administration, has been directed to be taken into account to be treated as a qualifying service so as to grant the pensionary benefits under the Old Pension Scheme. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the service which has been rendered by the respondents in an Aided Institution with KANCHAN 2026.07.18 10:29 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment CWP-21199-2026 (O&M) 2 Government of Haryana could not have been treated as a valid service to be defined as qualifying service to be taken into account by Chandigarh Administration. Learned counsel submits that the direction given by the Tribunal dated 06.02.2025 (Annexure P-1) may kindly be set-aside. 3. We have heard learned counsel for the petitioners and have gone through the record with their able assistance. 4. It may be noticed that the similar issue was raised before the Tribunal by one Dheerja Sharma who was working with the Kendriya Vidalaya Sangathan before her appointment with the Chandigarh Administration and also claimed the benefit of pay protection and counting of the service rendered with the Kendriya Vidalaya Sangathan to be treated as a qualifying service for computing the pension and pensionary benefits. The said Original Application was allowed on 29.11.2024 titled as Dheerja Sharma Vs. Chandigarh Administration through Secretary, Education U.T. (in OA No. 1311/2017), which judgment has been implemented by the petitioners. 5. Once, similar relief as granted by the Tribunal to Smt. Dheerja Sharma in November, 2024 has been accepted and implemented, the question arises why such benefit given to the respondents is being challenged by way of present petition. One thing is clear that the petitioners are challenging the orders passed by the Tribunal on the same issue by pick and choose method. The same relief granted to Smt. Dheerja Sharma has not been objected to and implemented, whereas, the similar relief granted to the respondents, which order is also based upon the benefit granted to Smt. KANCHAN 2026.07.18 10:29 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment CWP-21199-2026 (O&M) 3 Dheerja Sharma, is being challenged so as to invite a contrary order to the relief already granted to the similarly situated employees. 6. Once, a similarly situated employee has been granted the relief by the petitioners by implementing a similar direction given by the Tribunal, challenge to similar direction in the case of respondents herein, cannot be upheld. 7. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that though, the service which the respondent No. 1 rendered with the Government of Haryana was a pensionable job but she had not become eligible to get pension as, the service rendered by respondent No. 1 was only of seven years though, only after rendering 10 years service under the Old Pension Scheme, the employee becomes eligible to seek pension and, therefore, such service which cannot be treated as a pensionable in case of the respondent No. 1 cannot be counted so as to grant her the benefit under the Old Pension Scheme. 8. It may be noticed that once the service on which the respondent No. 1 was working with the Govt. Aided Institution with Government of Haryana as JBT Teacher was pensionable and in case respondents would have continued there, the benefit of pension would have accrued on completion of 10 years service and merely that before a period of 10 years, the respondent No. 1 was selected with the Chandigarh Administration as JBT Teacher on 26.03.2007 where he joined and continued, the petitioners cannot be allowed to say that respondent No. 1 was not eligible to get pension or he was not working on a pensionable job prior to joining the Chandigarh Administration so as to count such experience to be treated as a KANCHAN 2026.07.18 10:29 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment CWP-21199-2026 (O&M) 4 qualifying service and to treat respondent No. 1 under the Old Pension Scheme. 9. The only requirement is that the service rendered as JBT Teacher at Dev Nagri Primary School, Mustafabad, Yamuna Nagar, Haryana, prior to joining as a JBT Teacher dated 26.03.2007 at Chandigarh Administration should be a pensionable job, which concededly same was and, therefore, the said benefit granted to respondent No. 1 by the Tribunal of counting the earlier service towards pension and pensionary benefits under the Old Pension Scheme by treating the same to be a qualifying service cannot be treated as perverse either to law or against any Rule. 10. Further, learned counsel for the respondents submits that respondent No. 1 had resigned from the earlier services before joining the Chandigarh Administration, therefore, the earlier service stands washed off. It may be noticed that where a technical resignation is given with the permission of the earlier employer so as to join a new Employer, the earlier service is not washed off rather, the same is to be treated as a valid service and continuance for all intents and purposes including pay protection etc. It is only where the resignation is given to leave the job, the earlier service is washed off. Hence, the contention raised by learned counsel for the petitioners cannot be accepted. 11. No other argument is raised. 12. Keeping in view the above, no ground is made out for any interference by this Court in the present petition. 13. Dismissed. KANCHAN 2026.07.18 10:29 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment CWP-21199-2026 (O&M) 5 14. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stands disposed of. (HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI) JUDGE (AMARINDER SINGH GREWAL) July 15, 2026 JUDGE kanchan Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes Whether reportable : No KANCHAN 2026.07.18 10:29 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment