Disposed

Susheela v. State of Haryana and Others

Punjab & Haryana HC11 Sept 2026CWP/29529/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This is a certified shorthand written judgment. The Court granted a direction to the respondents to decide the petitioner's claim for Old Pension Scheme benefit within 04 months, ensuring a fair hearing, by analogy with a coordinate bench judgment.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the respondents to consider and decide the petitioner's claim for Old Pension Scheme benefit within 04 months in accordance with law, after granting an opportunity of hearing, and to reco

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

¶1

IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

115 CWP-29529-2026 Date of Decision: 11.09.2026

SUSHEELA

... Petitioner

VERSUS

STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS

¶7

... Respondents

¶8

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMAN CHAUDHARY.

¶9

¶10

Present: Mr. Pankaj Chugh, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Udit Garg, Addl. A.G., Haryana.

¶11

¶12

AMAN CHAUDHARY, J. (ORAL)

¶13

Learned counsel submits that the petitioner has not been granted the benefit of Old Pension Scheme despite the fact that the similarly circumstanced employees have been granted the same vide judgment dated 24.08.2026, Annexure P-16 passed by a Coordinate Bench in CWP-10970-2025 titled as ‘Suresh Kumar Versus State of Haryana and Others’ alongwith a batch of other writ petitions. She has submitted a representation, based on which her claim was recommended by the Deputy Commissioner of Police, Gurugram to the Director General of Police, Haryana on 30.10.2023, Annexure P-13. Reminder to the same was submitted on 23.07.2024, Annexure P-14 which was followed by a letter dated 26.09.2024, Annexure P-15, vide which the matter was forwarded by the Director General of Police, Haryana to the Addl. Chief Secretary to Govt. of Haryana, Home Department, Chandigarh, but no decision has been taken thereupon. He, on instructions, prays that a direction may be given to the respondents to decide the same in a time bound manner.

¶14

RAJENDER KUMAR 2026.09.11 15:14 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶15

CWP-29529-2026

¶16

-2-

¶17

Learned State counsel has no objection to the limited prayer made. 3. In view of the above and without commenting upon the merits of the case, this petition is hereby disposed of with a direction to the respondents to consider and decide the claim of the petitioner, within a period of 04 months, in accordance with law, taking note of the submissions made and judgment referred to hereinabove and after granting opportunity of hearing to her, which this Court has no reason to believe the authorities would not address in a just, fair and reasonable manner.

¶18

Upon doing so, if found entitled, grant the benefit forthwith. Needless to say, if the orders are adverse to her interest, the same shall contain reasons and she shall be free to seek legal redress thereupon.

¶19

(AMAN CHAUDHARY) SEPTEMBER 11, 2026. JUDGE Rajender Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No

¶20

RAJENDER KUMAR 2026.09.11 15:14 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Susheela v. State of Haryana and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Susheela 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases