1 CWP-23179-2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 123 CWP-23179-2026 Date of Decision: 28.07.2026 RAJESH KUMAR ...Petitioner VERSUS STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARPREET SINGH BRAR Present : Ms. Sunita Shekhawat, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Naveen Singh Panwar, DAG Haryana. **** HARPREET SINGH BRAR , J. (Oral) 1. This Civil Writ Petition has been filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India for issuance of an appropriate writ, order or direction, particularly a writ in the nature of mandamus, directing the respondents to regularize/confirm the services of the petitioner in accordance with the applicable service policy and in terms of the judgment rendered in Joginder v. State of Haryana, CWP-31304-2025 decided on 31.12.2025 (Annexure P-9), and further directing the respondents to grant appropriate compensation to the petitioner for the mental agony and PARUL VERMA 2026.07.28 16:31 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. 2 CWP-23179-2026 harassment caused on account of the unjustified delay in considering the petitioner's legitimate claim. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners, inter alia, contends that the petitioner has been serving as a part-time Sweeper since 30.07.2002 and has rendered more than 22 years of continuous service without any break. Despite his long and uninterrupted service, the respondents have failed to regularize his services. It is further submitted that the petitioner is squarely covered by the judgment rendered by this Court in Joginder Singh (supra) wherein employees who had completed ten years or more of service as on 31.12.2025 were held entitled to consideration for regularization. 2.1. Learned counsel further contends that although the petitioner submitted a legal notice seeking regularization, the respondents have failed to take any decision on his claim. It is argued that similarly situated part- time Sweepers have already been regularized, whereas the petitioner's case has been ignored without any justifiable reason, thereby violating the mandate of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. Accordingly, learned counsel prays that the respondents be directed to regularize the services of the petitioner with all consequential benefits in terms of the law laid down by this Court. PARUL VERMA 2026.07.28 16:31 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. 3 CWP-23179-2026 2.2. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner confines the prayer to the limited extent that the petitioner would be satisfied if his legal notice dated 05.05.2026 (Annexure P-6) is decided by respondent No.2/competent authority in the light of Annexure P-9 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 legal notice dated 05.05.2026 (Annexure P-6) of the petitioner by passing a speaking order. 4. Therefore, in view of the limited prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner, respondent No.2/competent authority is directed to consider the legal notice dated 05.05.2026 (Annexure P-6) of the petitioner in the light of Annexure P-9, judgment rendered by Division Bench of this Court in Aas Mohammad And Others Vs State Of Haryana And Others, LPA-1810-2025 and judgment rendred by Hon'ble Supreme Court in Madan Singh & Ors. v. State of Haryana, Civil Appeal No.2031 of 2024 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 PARUL VERMA 2026.07.28 16:31 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. 4 CWP-23179-2026 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 28.07.2026 parul verma Whether speaking/reasoned. : Yes/No Whether Reportable. : Yes/No PARUL VERMA 2026.07.28 16:31 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.