1 CWP-29566-2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH AT CHANDIGARH AT CHANDIGARH AT CHANDIGARH 110 CWP-29566-2026 Date of Decision: 11.09.2026 Vijay Shankar Sharma and others Vijay Shankar Sharma and others Vijay Shankar Sharma and others Vijay Shankar Sharma and others ....Petitioners VERSUS VERSUS VERSUS VERSUS State of Haryana and others State of Haryana and others State of Haryana and others State of Haryana and others ….Respondents CORAM: CORAM: CORAM: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARPREET SINGH BRAR HARPREET SINGH BRAR HARPREET SINGH BRAR HARPREET SINGH BRAR Present : Mr. Rajat Mor and Mr. Vishesh Dhaka, Advocates for the petitioners. Mr. Naveen Singh Panwar, DAG Haryana. HARPREET SINGH BRAR HARPREET SINGH BRAR HARPREET SINGH BRAR HARPREET SINGH BRAR, J. (Oral) , J. (Oral) , J. (Oral) , J. (Oral) 1. This civil writ petition has been filed under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India for seeking issuance of an appropriate writ, order or direction, especially a writ in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondents to consider the petitioners under the Old Pension Scheme (GPF Scheme) in terms of Government Instructions dated 08.05.2023 (Annexure P-5) and in view of the judgment dated 24.08.2026 (Annexure P-9) passed by this Court in the bunch of writ petitions led by CWP No. 10970 of 2025 as well as other judicial precedents rendered in cases of similarly situated employees, along with all consequential benefits, including arrears and pensionary/retiral benefits, from the date the same became due. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners, inter alia, contends that the petitioners applied for various posts advertised vide Advertisement PARUL VERMA 2026.09.11 14:30 I attest the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment 2 CWP-29566-2026 No.1/05 dated 21.06.2005 and Advertisement No.2/05 dated 14.12.2005 (Annexures P-1 and P-2, respectively) issued by the respondent- University prior to 28.10.2005. The claim of the petitioners is squarely covered by the Office Memorandum dated 08.05.2023 (Annexure P-5) extending one-time option for coverage under the Old Pension Scheme to the employees appointed against posts advertised prior to 28.10.2005 but appointed on or after 01.01.2006. The respondent-University issued notification on 13.06.2023 (Annexure P-6) adopting the Government instructions and inviting eligible employees to exercise the option. The petitioners submitted their options within the stipulated time. The respondent-University forwarded the claim of the petitioners and other similar situated employees to the Government of Haryana as is discernible from Annexure P-8. He further submits that the claim of the petitioners is squarely covered by judgments rendered by this Court in Suresh Kumar vs. State of Haryana and others, CWP Suresh Kumar vs. State of Haryana and others, CWP Suresh Kumar vs. State of Haryana and others, CWP Suresh Kumar vs. State of Haryana and others, CWP----10970 10970 10970 10970----2025 2025 2025 2025, decided on 24.08.2026 (Annexure P-9) and Om Parkash vs. State of Om Parkash vs. State of Om Parkash vs. State of Om Parkash vs. State of Haryana and others Haryana and others Haryana and others Haryana and others, CWP CWP CWP CWP----20263 20263 20263 20263----2024 2024 2024 2024 decided on 09.07.2026. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners has limited his prayer to the extent that the present petition be treated as a comprehensive representation and the same be decided by respondent No.1/competent authority in the light of judgments rendered by this Court in Suresh Suresh Suresh Suresh Kumar (supra) Kumar (supra) Kumar (supra) Kumar (supra) and Om Parkash (supra) Om Parkash (supra) Om Parkash (supra) Om Parkash (supra) in a time-bound manner, by passing a speaking order after affording the petitioners an opportunity of being heard. PARUL VERMA 2026.09.11 14:30 I attest the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment 3 CWP-29566-2026 4. Upon advance notice, learned State counsel appears on behalf of the respondent-State and submits that the grievance raised by the petitioners in the present writ petition would be considered by passing a reasoned speaking order in accordance with the law by respondent No.1/competent authority. 5. In view of the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the present writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent No.1/competent authority to treat the present writ petition as a comprehensive representation and to consider the claim of the petitioners in the light of Suresh Kumar (supra) Suresh Kumar (supra) Suresh Kumar (supra) Suresh Kumar (supra) and Om Parkash (supra) Om Parkash (supra) Om Parkash (supra) Om Parkash (supra). A reasoned and speaking order shall be passed after affording the petitioners an opportunity of hearing within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. 6. 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 the respondent No.1/competent authority. 7. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. 11.09.2026 (HARPREET SINGH BRAR) (HARPREET SINGH BRAR) (HARPREET SINGH BRAR) (HARPREET SINGH BRAR) parul verma JUDGE JUDGE JUDGE JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned. : Yes/No Whether Reportable. : Yes/No PARUL VERMA 2026.09.11 14:30 I attest the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment