Disposed

Pushappreet Singh v. State of Punjab and Others

Punjab & Haryana HC8 Jan 2026CWP/18329/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This bench of the Punjab and Haryana High Court disposed of two writ petitions filed by successful candidates who were not permitted to join service as Intelligence Officers despite vacancies and eligibility. The Court directed the respondent department to consider their candidature and take an independent decision based on applicable rules, without expressing an opinion on the merits of their ent

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondent department to consider candidature of petitioners for appointment and take independent decision in accordance with applicable Rules and Regulations.

Pushappreet Singh Vs State of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Punjab & Haryana HC (2026)

¶1

¶2

CWP-18329-2022 AND CWP-6181-2017

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

(I) CWP-18329-2022 (O&M) Reserved on: 13.10.2025 Pronounced on: 08.01.2026 Uploaded on: 09.01.2026

¶5

PUSHAPPREET SINGH -PETITIONER

¶6

V/S

¶7

STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS -RESPONDENTS

¶8

(II) CWP-6181-2017 (O&M)

¶9

SARJ SINGH -PETITIONER

¶10

V/S

¶11

STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS -RESPONDENTS

¶12

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP TIWARI

¶13

Present: Mr. D.S. Patwalia, Sr. Advocate, with Mr. Gauravjit S. Patwalia, Advocate for the petitioner (in CWP-18329-2022).

¶14

Ms. Anu Chatrath, Sr. Additional A.G., Punjab, assisted by Dr. Dharminder S. Lamba, Addl. A.G., Punjab.

¶15

***

¶16

KULDEEP TIWARI, J.

¶17

Both these writ petitions encompass a common prayer seeking issuance of directions to the respondent-department to permit the petitioners to join as Intelligence Officers (in the rank of Sub-Inspector) in the Intelligence Wing of the Punjab Police, pursuant to Advertisement No.2/2016 dated 08.09.2016.

¶18

The grievance of the petitioners is that, despite theirs possessing the requisite educational qualifications, as prescribed for the

¶19

DEVINDER YADAV 2026.01.09 09:41 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment

¶20

CWP-18329-2022 AND CWP-6181-2017 2

¶21

advertised posts, and despite theirs remaining successful in the selection process, and despite there being existence of vacancies, the respondentdepartment has failed to allow them to join service. To be precise, the petitioner (in CWP-18329-2022) asserts that his name appears at Serial No.3 in the waiting list under the S.C. (VMS) category, whereas the petitioner (in CWP-6181-2017) claims that his name appears at Serial No. 56 in the merit list, out of a total of 58 candidates selected. Despite availability of vacant posts and their eligibility for appointment, the petitioners have not been permitted to join.

¶22

It is pertinent to note that certain candidates, who had participated in the selection process for the advertised posts but were declared disqualified on account of non-fulfilment of the requisite educational qualifications, had also approached this Court by filing CWP2533-2017 along with a batch of connected writ petitions. During the pendency of those writ petitions, interim stay had been granted in favour of the petitioners therein. However, CWP-2533-2017 along with eight connected writ petitions, having been found to be devoid of merit, now stand dismissed by this Court vide order of even date.

¶23

In view of the above, these writ petitions are disposed of with a direction to the respondent-department to consider the candidature of the petitioners for appointment to the advertised posts and to take an independent decision on their claim, strictly in accordance with the applicable Rules and Regulations. It is clarified that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the petitioners’ entitlement to

¶24

DEVINDER YADAV 2026.01.09 09:41 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment

¶25

¶26

CWP-18329-2022 AND CWP-6181-2017

¶27

appointment.

¶28

Both these writ petitions are disposed of accordingly.

¶29

Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of

¶30

accordingly.

¶31

A photocopy of this order be placed on file of connected case.

¶32

January 08, 2026	(KU	LDEEP TIWARI) JUDGE
devinder
Whether speaking/reasoned	:	Yes/No
Whether Reportable	:	Yes/No

¶33

DEVINDER YADAV 2026.01.09 09:41 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment

Pushappreet Singh v. State of Punjab and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pushappreet Singh v. State of Punjab and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Gurbachan Singh and Anr. Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Prime Proteins Ltd. Vs P.O. Labour Court Bathinda and Anr.

Ramesh Chander Bawa Vs the Presiding Officer and Anr.

M/S Chaman Lal Bhalla & Co. Vs Presiding Officer Industrial Tribunal Amritsar & Anr.

State of Haryana Vs Dharambir etc.

Gargi Verma Vs District Magistrate Ambala and Anr.