Balbir Singh Vs State of Haryana and Anr. — Writ and Judicial Review | Punjab & Haryana HC (2026)

Balbir Singh Vs State of Haryana and Anr. — Writ and Judicial Review | Punjab & Haryana HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Direction to respondent No.2/competent authority to hear and decide the representation dated 21.04.2026 (Annexure P-10) by passing a speaking order in a time bound manner in terms of Madan Singh (supra) within three months from receipt of certified copy of the order, to convey the decision to the petitioner, and to grant the relief sought forthwith if the petitioner is found entitled; pending miscellaneous applications disposed of.

Issue for consideration

Whether the respondents should be directed to consider the petitioner's case for regularization as per the regularization policies and give all consequential benefits from the due date. +1 more

Court's answer

If the petitioner is found entitled to the relief sought, the same is to be granted forthwith by the respondent/competent authority.

Ratio / Principle

Without commenting upon the merits, the petition is disposed of and respondent No.2/competent authority is directed to hear and decide the representation dated 21.04.2026 (Annexure P-10) by passing a speaking order in a time bound manner in terms of the judgment in Madan Singh (supra).

Key takeaways

The decision on the representation is to be taken within a period of three months from the date of receiving a certified copy of this order, and the decision taken shall be conveyed to the petitioner.ratio¶21

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Civil writ petition (CWP-15175-2026) under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India by Balbir Singh against the State of Haryana and others, seeking a writ in the nature of mandamus directing consideration of his case for regularization as per the regularization policies with all consequential benefits from the due date. Counsel for the petitioner confined the prayer to a direction to respondent No.2 to decide the representation dated 21.04.2026 (Annexure P-10) by passing a speaking order in a time bound manner in terms of the Supreme Court judgment in Madan Singh and others v. State of Haryana and others, Civil Appeal No.1996-2024, decided 16.04.2026 (Annexure P-9). Counsel for the respondents accepted notice stating no objection. Without commenting on merits, the Court (Harpreet Singh Brar, J.) disposed of the petition, directing respondent No.2/competent authority to hear and decide the representation by a speaking order in terms of Madan Singh (supra) within three months from receipt of a certified copy of the order and to convey the decision to the petitioner; if the petitioner is found entitled to the relief sought, the same is to be granted forthwith. Pending miscellaneous applications also stand disposed of. Decision dated 15.05.2026.

1

CWP-15175-2026

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

116 CWP-15175-2026 Date of Decision: 15.05.2026

Balbir Singh

....Petitioner

VERSUS

State of Haryana and others

...Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARPREET SINGH BRAR

Present : Mr. R.S Mamli, Advocates the petitioner.

Mr. Piyush Khanna, Addl. AG, Haryana. Mr. Vikrant Pamboo, Advocate for respondent No.2.

HARPREET SINGH BRAR, J. (Oral)

The present writ petition has been filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for regularization as per the regularization policies and to give all consequential benefits from due date.

Learned counsel for the petitioner at this stage submits that he would be satisfied if a direction is issued to the respondent No.2 to decide the representation dated 21.04.2026 (Annexure P-10) by passing a speaking order in a time bound manner in terms of the judgment rendered by Hon’ble

PUNEET CHAWLA 2026.05.18 12:02 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

2

CWP-15175-2026

Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No.1996-2024, Madan Singh and others Versus State of Haryana and others , decided on 16.04.2026 (Annexure P-9).

On advance notice, Mr. Piyush Khanna, learned Additional Advocate General accepts notice on behalf of respondent No.1, whereas, Mr. Vikrant Pamboo, Advocate accepts notice on behalf of respondent No.2 and submits that they have no objection in case a direction is issued to the respondent No.2/competent authority to hear and decide the representation dated 21.04.2026 (Annexure P-10) by passing a speaking order in a time bound manner in terms of the judgment rendered by Hon’ble Supreme Court in Madan Singh (supra) .

In view of the limited prayer made by counsel for the petitioner without commenting upon the merits of the case, the present petition is disposed of and the respondent No.2/competent authority is directed to hear and decide the representation dated 21.04.2026 (Annexure P-10) by passing a speaking order in a time bound manner in terms of the judgment rendered in Madan Singh (supra) within a period of three months from the date of receiving a certified copy of this order. Further the decision taken thereof shall be conveyed to the petitioner.

Needless to say, if the petitioner is found entitled to the relief sought, the same be granted forthwith by respondent/competent authority.

PUNEET CHAWLA 2026.05.18 12:02 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

3

CWP-15175-2026

Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stands

disposed of.

(HARPREET SINGH BRAR) JUDGE

15.05.2026

Puneet Chawla

Whether speaking/reasoned. : Yes/No Whether Reportable. : Yes/No

PUNEET CHAWLA 2026.05.18 12:02 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document