1 CWP-21754-2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 127 CWP-21754-2026 Date of Decision: 20.07.2026 BALJEET SINGH ALIAS BALJIT SINGH ....Petitioner VERSUS STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARPREET SINGH BRAR Present : Mr. Sanchit Punia, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Rahul Dev Singh, Addl. AG Haryana. **** HARPREET SINGH BRAR , J. (Oral) 1. This Civil Writ Petition is being filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of an appropriate writ, order or direction, particularly a writ in the nature of Mandamus, directing the respondents to treat the petitioner's suspension period from 03.08.2015 to 05.01.2017 as a period spent on duty for all intents and purposes, with all consequential service benefits, including arrears and interest thereon; and further directing the respondents to consider and decide the petitioner's representation dated 25.10.2024 (Annexure P-6), forwarded by the Principal PARUL VERMA 2026.07.20 17:57 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. 2 CWP-21754-2026 vide letter dated 25.10.2024 (Annexure P-7), as well as the subsequent representation dated 12.06.2026 (Annexure P-9), by passing a reasoned and speaking order within a stipulated period. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner, inter alia, contends that the petitioner was placed under suspension solely on account of the pendency of a criminal case and not on account of any departmental misconduct. It is submitted that upon the petitioner's acquittal, which has attained finality as the State Government has not preferred any appeal against the judgment of acquittal, the very basis of the suspension ceased to exist. Consequently, the petitioner is entitled to have the period of suspension treated as a period spent on duty, along with all consequential service benefits. 2.1. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner confines the prayer to the limited extent that the petitioner would be satisfied if his representation dated 12.06.2026 (Annexure P-9) is decided by respondent No.2/competent authority by passing a speaking order within a time-bound period. 3. Learned State counsel, appearing on advanced notice, submits that he has no objection in case a direction is issued to the respondent No.2/competent authority for time-bound consideration and decision of the PARUL VERMA 2026.07.20 17:57 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. 3 CWP-21754-2026 representation dated 12.06.2026 (Annexure P-9) of the petitioner by passing a speaking order. 4. Therefore, in view of the limited prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner, the respondent No.2/competent authority is directed to consider and decide the representation dated 12.06.2026 (Annexure P-9) of the petitioner and pass a speaking order, after affording him an opportunity to be heard, within a period of 02 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 the respondent. 5. Disposed of, accordingly. (HARPREET SINGH BRAR) JUDGE 20.07.2026 parul verma Whether speaking/reasoned. : Yes/No Whether Reportable. : Yes/No PARUL VERMA 2026.07.20 17:57 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.