1 CWP-28289-2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 118 CWP-28289-2026 Date of Decision: 03.09.2026 Saroj Bala .....Petitioner VERSUS State of Haryana and others ..Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARPREET SINGH BRAR Present : Mr. S.S. Pattar & Mr. Vinayakk Pattar, Advocates for the petitioner. Mr. Rahul Dev Singh, Addl. AG & Mr. Naveen Singh Panwar, DAG Haryana. HARPREET SINGH BRAR, J. (Oral) 1. The present writ petition has been filed under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India seeking issuance of an appropriate writ, order or direction, particularly in the nature of mandamus, directing the respondents to grant remuneration of Rs.57,700/- per month to the petitioner upon acquiring the requisite eligibility qualification (Ph.D.) and being entitled to be treated as Eligible Extension Lecturer w.e.f 25.11.2022 along with all consequential monetary benefits and arrears. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner, inter alia, contends that the petitioner was initially engaged as an Extension Lecturer in a Government College under the Higher Education Department, Haryana and, PUNEET CHAWLA 2026.09.05 14:03 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 2 CWP-28289-2026 subsequently, acquired the requisite Ph.D. qualification on 25.11.2022, thereby fulfilling the eligibility criteria for being treated as an Eligible Extension Lecturer and for grant of enhanced remuneration at the rate of Rs.57,700/- per month. The Ph.D. degree of the petitioner was duly verified by the Principal of Government College, Kanina, from the concerned University. The petitioner thereafter submitted a representation dated 24.11.2021 (Annexure P-3) seeking grant of enhanced remuneration upon acquiring the requisite qualification; however, the said benefit has not been extended to the petitioner. 3. Learned counsel further submits that the issue involved in the present petition is no longer res integra and that similarly situated Extension Lecturers have already been granted the benefit of enhanced remuneration pursuant to the judgment dated 28.11.2023 passed by this Court in CWP- 1887 of 2019 and connected matters, Kalyan Singh and others Versus State of Haryana and others (Annexure P-4), followed by the order dated 30.09.2024 passed in CWP-14904 of 2024, Dr.Dusyant and others Versus State of Haryana and another (Annexure P-5). Learned counsel also refers to the order dated 05.05.2026 passed in CWP-6464 of 2026, Dr. Mohita Sharma and others v. State of Haryana and others (Annexure P-6), whereby similarly situated Extension Lecturers, who had acquired eligibility by obtaining Ph.D./NET, were granted the benefit of enhanced remuneration. It is, thus, contended that the petitioner, being similarly situated, cannot be denied the same benefit and that the action of the PUNEET CHAWLA 2026.09.05 14:03 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 3 CWP-28289-2026 respondents in withholding the enhanced remuneration amounts to arbitrary and discriminatory treatment. 4. Learned counsel, however, submits that at this stage, he would be satisfied if the present writ petition itself is treated as a comprehensive representation of the petitioner and respondent No.2/competent authority is directed to consider and decide the same by passing a reasoned and speaking order in the light of judgments (Annexures P-4 to P-6), strictly in accordance with law, within a stipulated period. 5. Learned State Counsel accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State and submits that he has no objection if the present writ petition is treated as a comprehensive representation of the petitioner and respondent No.2 /competent authority is directed to consider and decide the same within a stipulated period. 6. In view of the limited prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the claim, the present writ petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No.2 /competent authority to treat the present writ petition as a comprehensive representation of the petitioner and to consider and decide the same, in accordance with law, by passing a reasoned and speaking order in the light of judgments (Annexure P-4 to P-6) within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. The decision so taken shall be duly communicated to the petitioner forthwith. PUNEET CHAWLA 2026.09.05 14:03 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 4 CWP-28289-2026 7. Needless to say, if the petitioner is found entitled to the relief sought, the same shall be granted by the respondent/competent authority in accordance with law. 8. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. (HARPREET SINGH BRAR) JUDGE 03.09.2026 Puneet Chawla Whether speaking/reasoned. : Yes/No Whether Reportable. : Yes/No PUNEET CHAWLA 2026.09.05 14:03 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document