114 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-28105-2026 Date of decision: 02.09.2026 Vanita Devi and another ....Petitioners Versus State of Haryana and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARPREET SINGH BRAR Present: Ms. Riya Malik, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Rahul Dev Singh, Addl.A.G., Haryana. HARPREET SINGH BRAR, J. (ORAL) 1. The present civil writ petition has been filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to regularize the services of the petitioners on the post of TGT Hindi and SST, respectively. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners inter alia contends that in terms of the latest decision of the Supreme Court in Madan Singh and others v. State of Haryana and others, 2026 INSC 379, dated 16.04.2026, the petitioners are entitled to regularisation under the Government notification dated 16.06.2014 & 18.06.2014. 2.1. She further submits that at this stage, the petitioners will be satisfied in case the representation (Annexure P-12) of the petitioners is decided by respondent No.2-Director, Secondary Education Department by passing a speaking order in a time bound manner. 3. Notice of motion. NEHA 2026.09.02 17:29 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh CWP-28105-2026 -2- 4. Mr. Rahul Dev Singh, Addl.A.G., Haryana puts in appearance and accepts notice on behalf of the respondents-State and submits that he has no objection in case a direction is issued to respondent No.2-Director, Secondary Education Department for time-bound consideration and decision of the representation of the petitioners by passing a speaking order in accordance with law in the light of the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Madan Singh’s case (supra) within six months. 5. In view of the statement made, learned counsel for the petitioners has no objection to the petition being disposed of in terms thereof. 6. Ordered accordingly. 7. In case the order is not passed within the stipulated period, the officer concerned shall pay costs of `50,000 to the petitioners. (HARPREET SINGH BRAR) JUDGE 02.09.2026 Neha Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No NEHA 2026.09.02 17:29 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh