CWP-24577-2026 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 110 CWP-24577-2026 (O&M) Date of decision: 07.08.2026 Neelam Sharma and another ....Petitioners Versus State of Haryana and others ....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARPREET SINGH BRAR Present: Mr. S.S. Patter, Advocate and Mr. Abhayjdet Singh, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Rahul Dev Singh, Addl. A.G., 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, directing the respondents to grant remuneration of Rs.57,700/- per month to the petitioners upon their acquiring the requisite eligibility qualification (Ph.D.) and being entitled to be treated as Eligible Extension Lecturers, with effect from their respective dates of eligibility along with all consequential monetary benefits and arrears. Further prayer has been made to direct the respondents to release the differential amount arising out of non-payment of remuneration at the rate of Rs.57,700/- per month from the respective dates when the petitioners became eligible with interest. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners has, inter alia, contended that the petitioners are working as Extension Lecturers in MOHD YAKUB 2026.08.10 14:38 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Punjab & Haryana High Court, Chandigarh. CWP-24577-2026 2 Government Colleges under the Higher Education Department, Haryana, and petitioner No.1, namely Neelam Sharma, acquired the degree of Ph.D. on 30.09.2021, whereas petitioner No.2, namely Dr. Gunjan Kalra, acquired the degree of Ph.D. on 02.09.2022, thereby fulfilling the eligibility criteria prescribed for being treated as "Eligible Extension Lecturers" and becoming entitled to receive remuneration at the rate of Rs.57,700/- per month. Despite the petitioners having acquired the requisite qualification, the respondents have continued to pay them remuneration at the rate of Rs.35,400/- per month applicable to "Non-Eligible Extension Lecturers", and the said action of the respondents is arbitrary, discriminatory and contrary to the settled legal position. It is further contended that the controversy involved in the present petition is no longer res integra as identically situated Extension Lecturers approached this Court by way of filing CWP No.6464 of 2026 and connected cases titled as Dr. Mohita Sharma and others vs. State of Haryana and others, which was allowed vide judgment dated 05.05.2026, granting identical relief (Annexure P-5), and the said view is consistent with the earlier judgments rendered by this Court in CWP No.1887 of 2019 decided on 23.11.2023 and CWP No.14904 of 2024 decided on 30.09.2024. It is further submitted that although the petitioners have already submitted representations to the competent authorities seeking release of remuneration at the admissible rate from the date of acquiring the Ph.D. qualification, however, the respondents have neither considered nor decided the same till date. MOHD YAKUB 2026.08.10 14:38 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Punjab & Haryana High Court, Chandigarh. CWP-24577-2026 3 2.1. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that he would be satisfied if the instant writ petition of the petitioners is treated as a comprehensive representation and the same be decided by respondent No.2 by passing a speaking order in a time bound manner. 3. Learned State counsel, appearing on advance notice, submits that he has no objection, in case a direction is issued to respondent No.2 for time-bound consideration and decision thereof by passing a speaking order. 4. Therefore, in view of the limited prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioners, the respondent No.2 is directed to treat this writ petition as a comprehensive representation and consider the case of the petitioners and pass a speaking order in the light of the judgment rendered by this Court in Mohita Sharma’s case (supra), after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners, within a period of 03 months from the date of receiving a certified copy of this order. Further, the decision taken thereof shall be conveyed to the petitioners. Needless to say, if the petitioners are found entitled to the relief sought, the same shall be granted forthwith by respondent No.2. 5. Disposed of, accordingly. (HARPREET SINGH BRAR) JUDGE 07.08.2026 yakub Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether reportable: Yes/No MOHD YAKUB 2026.08.10 14:38 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Punjab & Haryana High Court, Chandigarh.