Disposed¶28

Sonu and Ors. v. State of Haryana and Others

Punjab & Haryana HC13 Nov 2025CWP/2179/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Additional increment; Shetty Commission report; new entrants to service; writ petition disposed of; mandamus; representation Annexure P-9; Finance Department Government of Haryana clarification; respondent No.2 Punjab and Haryana High Court Chandigarh; decide representation within six weeks; CWP-2179-2020; Sonu and Ors. v. State of Haryana and Ors.; Kuldeep Tiwari J.; oral order; November 13, 2025.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondents No. 2 and 3 to decide the representations (Annexure P-9) in accordance with law, preferably within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of the order. ¶28

Sonu and Ors. Vs State of Haryana and Others — Punjab & Haryana HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶28

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioners, being new entrants to service, are entitled to directions for grant of the benefit of one additional increment in terms of the report of the Shetty Commission, accepted by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the State Government. +1 more

¶15

Ratio / Principle

The writ petition stands disposed of with a direction to respondents No. 2 and 3 to decide the representations (Annexure P-9) in accordance with law, preferably within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of the order.

¶28

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Punjab and Haryana High Court (Single Bench: Kuldeep Tiwari, J.; decision dated November 13, 2025) disposes of CWP-2179-2020 (Sonu and Ors. v. State of Haryana and Ors.), in which the petitioners, being new entrants to service, sought directions for grant of the benefit of one additional increment in terms of the report of the Shetty Commission, duly accepted by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the State Government. On the previous hearing (07.11.2025) the petitioner's counsel had expressed satisfaction with a mandamus upon respondent No.2 - Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh - to decide the representation in view of a clarification given by the Finance Department, Govt. of Haryana. At the resumed hearing, learned counsel for respondents No. 2 and 3 submitted that the representations (Annexure P-9) would be considered and decided expeditiously in view of the clarification now issued by the Finance Department, Government of Haryana. Accordingly, the Court disposed of the writ petition with a direction to respondents No. 2 and 3 to decide the representations (Annexure P-9) in accordance with law, preferably within six weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of the order.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

111

¶3

CWP-2179-2020 Date of Decision : November 13, 2025

SONU AND ORS.

-PETITIONERS

V/S

STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS.

¶8

-RESPONDENTS

¶9

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP TIWARI

¶10

Present: Mr. Satya Vir Singh Yadav, Advocate, and Mr. Shivam Sharma, Advocate for the petitioners.

¶11

Mr. Bhupender Singh, Addl. A.G., Haryana.

¶12

Mr. Kanwal Goyal, Advocate, and Ms. Sheena Dahiya, Advocate and Ms. Komal Klana, Advocate for the respondents No.2 and 3.

¶13

¶14

KULDEEP TIWARI, J. (ORAL)

¶15

The prayer embodied in the instant writ petition is for issuance of directions to the respondent(s) to grant the benefit of one additional increment to the petitioners, being new entrants to the service, in terms of the report of the Shetty Commission, which has been duly accepted by the Hon’ble Supreme Court as well as by the State Government.

¶16

On the previous date of hearing, i.e. 07.11.2025, this Court had passed the following order:-

¶17

“Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that he would be satisfied that in case, a mandamus is passed upon the respondent No.2-Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh, to decide the representation, in view of clarification now given by

¶18

DEVINDER YADAV 2025.11.14 09:50 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment

¶19

CWP-2179-2020

¶20

¶21

the Finance Department, Govt. of Haryana.

¶22

Mr. Kanwal Goyal, Advocate, who has caused appearance on behalf of the respondent No.2- Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh, submits that he needs to have instructions from the quarter concerned, in this regard, and has made a request for an adjournment.

¶23

Asked for request is accepted.

¶24

List this matter on 13.11.2025, for arguments.

¶25

To be shown in the urgent list.

¶26

It is made clear that on the next date of hearing, no request for an adjournment on behalf of either of the parties concerned, shall be entertained.”

¶27

Today, learned counsel appearing for respondents No. 2 and 3 submits that the representations (Annexure P-9) shall be considered and decided expeditiously in view of the clarification now issued by the Finance Department, Government of Haryana.

¶28

In view of the submission ( supra ), the instant writ petition stands disposed of with a direction to respondents No. 2 and 3 to decide the representations (Annexure P-9) in accordance with law, preferably within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of

¶29

this order.

¶30

(KULDEEP TIWARI) November 13, 2025 JUDGE devinder Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether Reportable : Yes/No

¶31

DEVINDER YADAV 2025.11.14 09:50 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment

Sonu and Ors. v. State of Haryana and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sonu and Ors. v. State of Haryana and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sukhmanpreet Singh Cheema and Others Vs Union of India and Others

Hemant Sharma Vs State Information Commission Haryana and Ors.

Mangal Singh and Others Vs State of Punjab and Others

The Managing Director Punjab State Co. Op Supply Vs Shiv Kumar and Others

Dainik Bhaskar Corporation Ltd. Vs Presiding Officer Industrialtribunal Cum Labour Court Ut Chandigarh and Another

Reciever, Swami Uma Bharti Public School and Anr. Vs State Information Commission, Haryana and Others