Disposed

Bijender Kumar and Others v. State of Haryana and Others

Punjab & Haryana HC11 Sept 2026CWP/29467/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition, the petitioners, who have been in temporary employment, sought regularization in view of recent Supreme Court judgments. The court disposed of the petition without expressing an opinion on merits, directing the authorities to decide the petitioners' representation within six months.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the competent authority to consider and decide the petitioners' representation within six months by passing a speaking and reasoned order.

Bijender Kumar and Others Vs State of… — Service and Employment | Punjab & Haryana HC (2026)

¶1

CWP-29467-2026 (O & M) 1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶3

109

¶4

CWP No.29467 of 2026 (O & M) Date of decision :-11.09.2026

¶5

Bijender Kumar and others

¶6

…..Petitioners

¶7

Versus

¶8

State of Haryana and others

¶9

…..Respondents

¶10

CORAM:- HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA

¶11

Present:Mr. Krishan Singh, Advocat e for the petitioners.

¶12

NIDHI GUPTA J. (Oral)

¶13

Prayer in the present writ p etition is for issuance of an appropri a te writ, order or direction, parti c ularly a writ in the nature of Mandam u s, directing the respondents to r egularize the services of the petitione r s on the respective posts being manned by them, along with all conse q uential benefits, in terms of t h e Policy/Notification dated 18.06.20 1 4 (Annexure P-12) issued by t he State of Haryana and in view of t he judgment dated 16.04.2026 (Annexure P-13) passed by the Hon’ b le Supreme Court in Civil A p peal No.1996 of 2024 titled “ Madan Singh and others vs. State of Haryana and others ”.

¶14

It is, inter alia , submitted by learned counsel for the petitione r s that the eleven petitioners w ere appointed on monthly basis ag a inst Group-D posts of Assista n t Pump Operator during the period fr o m 2006 to 2009, as per the det a ils given in para 2 at page 10

¶15

VIJAY ASIJA 2026.09.11 17.10 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶16

CWP-29467-2026 (O & M) 2

¶17

of the w rit petition and Annexure P-8. It is submitted that the petitione r s have, thus, rendered more tha n 10 years of service and are entitled t o consideration for regularization in view of the judgment passed b y the Hon’ble Supreme Court i n “ Jaggo vs. Union of India and others ”, reported as 2024 SCC OnLine SC 3826 . It is further submitte d that, vide instructions dated 31 . 08.2021 (Annexure P-2), the designati o n of the post was changed to M ultipurpose Health Worker. The peti t ioners were thereafter regist e red with Haryana Kaushal Rozgar N igam Limited against Group- D posts in the year 2022 and Deploym e nt Offer Letters, including those issued to petitioners No.1 and 2, h ave been placed on record a s Annexures P-7 and P-8 respectiv e ly. Similar letters were issued to the remaining petitioners. Learned c ounsel submits that the petiti o ners were appointed against sanctioned vacant posts after followin g due procedure and have rendered more than 19 years of service. I t is, accordingly, prayed that their cla i m for regularization be con s idered in the light of the judgment in Jaggo’s case (supra).

¶18

Learned counsel for the pet i tioners further submits that, at this s t age, the petitioners would be satisfied if the present writ petition i s disposed of with a direction t o the respondents to consider and deci d e the representation dated 1 3 .08.2026 (Annexure P-15) submitte d by them, while keeping in vi e w the judgment in Jaggo’s case (sup r a).

¶19

Notice of motion.

¶20

VIJAY ASIJA 2026.09.11 17.10 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶21

CWP-29467-2026 (O & M) 3

¶22

Mr. Harish Kumar Nain, D A G, Haryana, accepts notice on behal f of the respondents and submi t s that he has no objection if the limit e d prayer made by learned cou n sel for the petitioners at this stage is a ccepted. It is, however, submit t ed that the service tenure of the petiti o ners would require verificati o n to ascertain whether they have ren d ered continuous and satisfactor y service so as to be eligible for regul a rization.

¶23

After hearing learned couns e l for the parties and without expressi n g any opinion on the merits o f the claim, the present writ petition i s disposed of with a direction t o the competent authority to consider a nd decide the representation da t ed 13.08.2026 (Annexure P- 15) sub m itted by the petitioners, by pas s ing a speaking and reasoned order, in a ccordance with law, within a period of six months from the date of r e ceipt of a certified copy of this order. While considering the claim, th e competent authority shall als o take into consideration the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Supr e me Court in Jaggo’s case (supra), a s well as the relevant policy/i n structions applicable to the petitione r s.

¶24

Pending application(s), if an y , shall stand disposed of.

¶25

Septemb e r 11, 2026 ( NIDHI GUPTA ) Vijay Asija JUDGE

¶26

Whether sp e aking/reasoned Yes / No Whether Re p ortable Yes / No

¶27

VIJAY ASIJA 2026.09.11 17.10 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Bijender Kumar and Others v. State of Haryana and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bijender Kumar and Others v. State of Haryana and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases