Gurmesh Parkash Bishnoi Vs State of… — Writ and Judicial Review | Punjab & Haryana HC (2025)

Gurmesh Parkash Bishnoi Vs State of… — Writ and Judicial Review | Punjab & Haryana HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Liberty to petitioner(s) to make a fresh representation to respondent Nos.1 and 2 within two weeks; respondent Nos.1 and 2 to look into the representation, objectively consider the grievance(s) in view of the dicta in M Gangadhara Kurup and K.S. Tomar, afford opportunity of hearing and take a ratiocinated decision within 60 days thereafter; decision to be communicated to the petitioner within fifteen days; pending application(s), if any, stand disposed off.

Issue for consideration

Whether Regulation 13(1) of the Haryana Public Service Commission (Condition of Service) Regulations, 2018, fixing the pension of the Chairman and members directly recruited/appointed @ 1/40th of the last pay drawn per month for each one year qualifying service, is arbitrary/discriminatory and liable to be quashed. +2 more

Ratio / Principle

Keeping in view the entirety of facts and circumstances and without going into merits, the instant petition (and the batch) is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner(s) to make a fresh representation to respondent Nos.1 and 2 within two weeks; respondent Nos.1 and 2 shall look into the representation, objectively consider the grievance(s) in view of the dicta in M Gangadhara Kurup (supra) and K.S. Tomar (supra), afford opportunity of hearing and take a ratiocinated decision in accordance with law within 60 days thereafter, communicating the decision to the petitioner within fifteen days of it being taken.

Key takeaways

Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed off.ratio¶27

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

BATCH DISPOSAL WITHOUT ENTERING MERITS — Three civil writ petitions (CWP-4562-2022, CWP-10399-2022, CWP-14874-2022) filed under Articles 226/227 by Chairman/members of the Haryana Public Service Commission challenged Regulation 13(1) and Regulation 13(5) of the Haryana Public Service Commission (Condition of Service) Regulations, 2018 (Annexure P-1, dated 17.12.2018) — the former fixing pension of directly recruited Chairman/members @ 1/40th of the last pay drawn per month for each year of qualifying service, the latter denying family pension on death while in service or after ceasing to hold office — and sought parity of the Chairman with the Chief Secretary for pension, gratuity and family pension. On counsel's limited prayer, and respondents raising no objection, the Division Bench (Sumeet Goel, J., author, with Sheel Nagu, CJ) disposed of the petitions with liberty to make fresh representations to respondent Nos.1 and 2 within two weeks; respondent Nos.1 and 2 directed to objectively consider the grievances in view of the dicta in M Gangadhara Kurup (Kerala HC, WP(C) No.3081-2013) and K.S. Tomar (HP HC, CWP-1331-2020), afford opportunity of hearing, take a ratiocinated decision within 60 days and communicate it within fifteen days; pending applications disposed off.

CWP-4562-2022 1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

CWP-4562-2022 (O&M) Date of decision: 02.07.2025

Gurmesh Parkash Bishnoi ....Petitioner

V/s

State of H aryana and others ....Respondents

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SHEEL NAGU, CHIEF JUSTICE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL

Present: Mr. S.P. Arora, Advocate wi t h Mr. Himanshu Arora, Advo c ate and Ms. Iarisa Carmen, Advocat e for the petitioner in CWP-4562-2022 and CW P -10399-2022. Mr. Inder Pal Goyat, Advoc a te for the petitioner in CWP-14874-2022. Mr. Naveen S. Bhardwaj, A d ditional Advocate General, Hry. Dr. Neha Awasthi, Advocat e for respondent No.2-HPSC (through Video Conference) .

Mr. Rupender Singh Rana a n d Ms. Naveeen Kaur, Advocat e Ms. Swati Dayalan, Advoca t e for respondent No.3

SUMEET GOEL, JUDGE

By way of the present com m on judgment, we proceed to de c ide

the insta n t batch of three civil writ petit i ons, since there is commonalit y of the facts and congruity of legal issues therein, as stated by learned r i val counsel. The details of these writ petitio n s read, thus:

(a) Gurmesh Parkash Bishnoi v s . State of Haryana and others (CWP-4562-2022) (b) Raghubar Dayal and others v s. State of Haryana and others (CWP-10399-2022) (c) Chatter Singh and others vs. State of Haryana and others (CWP-14874-2022)

AJAY KUMAR 2025.07.03 10:05 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CWP-4562-2022

2

For the cause of convenie n ce, the facts are drawn out f r om CWP-45 6 2-2022 titled as Gurmesh Par k ash Bishnoi vs. State of Haryana and other s (hereinafter referred to as the p etition in hand ).

The petition in hand has be e n preferred under Articles 226/ 2 27 of the Co n stitution of India with the follo w ing substantive prayer(s):

“i. Issuance of a writ in the nature of Certiorari for quashing o f the provision made in Regulatio n 13(1) of Haryana Public Se r vice Commission (Condition of Service) Regulations, 2018 (Annexure P -1) dated 17.12.2018 providing for t h e pension of the Chairman and mem b ers directly recruited/appointed, to b e fixed @ 1/40^th of the last pay draw n per month for each one year qualifyi n g service;

ii. Further for quashing R e gulation 13(5) of the said Regul a tion whereby it has been provided tha t no family pension shall be admissib l e to the family members in case of t h e death of a member while in servic e or after ceasing to hold the offic e the same provisions being arbit r ary, discriminatory having no nexus w ith the object sought to be achieved and amounts to creating sub-classif i cation with in a class and are fu r ther contrary to the various provisi o ns dealing with pension and grat u ity; being further in contradiction to the conditions of service governin g the Chairman of Haryana Public Ser v ice Commission; iii. Further, a writ in the nature of Mandamus, directing the respondents to treat the servic e of the petitioner as the Chairma n of Haryana Public Service Commi s sion at par with the Chief Secretar y for all intents and purposes includin g for grant of pension for his life as w ell as pension and death-cum-retire m ent gratuity as is available to the C hief Secretary and IAS Officers in the State and also to grant family pensi o n to the family members in case of t h e death of a member while in servic e or after ceasing to hold the office;”

Pleading the cause of the p etitioner, his learned counsel has iterated t h at he would be satisfied, for th e nonce , in case the writ petitio n in hand is disposed of by permitting the petitioner to make a f r esh represent a tion to the respondent Nos.1 a n d 2 in view of the enunciatio n of law by t h e Hon’ble Kerala High Court i n WP(C) No.3081-2013 titled a s M AJAY KUMAR 2025.07.03 10:05 I attest to the accuracy and Gangadhara Kurup & Ors. Vs. State of Kerala and Anr. and the Hon ’ ble integrity of this document

CWP-4562-2022 3 Himacha l Pradesh High Court in CWP- 1 331-2020 titled as K.S. Tomar vs.

State of Himachal Pradesh.

Learned counsel appearing f or the respondents submit that t h ey have no o bjection in case the limited pra y er made by the learned counsel for the petiti o ner, is accepted.

We have heard learned cou n sel for the rival parties and have perused t h e paper-book.

Keeping in view the entiret y of facts and circumstances of the case & w ithout going into merits thereo f , the instant petition is dispose d of with libe r ty to the petitioner(s) to make a fresh representation to respon d ent Nos.1 a n d 2 within a period of tw o weeks from today. On s u ch represent a tion being made by the petitio n er(s); it is directed that respon d ent Nos.1 an d 2 shall look into the said repr e sentation, objectively consider the grievanc e (s) raised in the said represen t ation in view of the dicta of the judgment s in the case of M Gangadhara Kurup case (supra) and K.S. Tomar c a se (supra) & take ratiocinated decision thereupon after affor d ing opportun i ty of hearing to petitioner(s), in accordance with law, withi n a period o f 60 days thereafter. Such d ecision be communicated to the petitione r within fifteen days of it bein g taken. Pending application(s ) , if any, shall also stand disposed off.

(SUMEET GOEL) JUDGE

(SHEEL NAGU) CHIEF JUSTICE

July 02, 2 025 Ajay

Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether reportable: Yes/No

AJAY KUMAR 2025.07.03 10:05 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document