Disposed

Vijay Shankar Sharma and Others v. 1STATE of Haryana and Others

Punjab & Haryana HC11 Sept 2026CWP/29566/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition seeks direction for inclusion of petitioners under the Old Pension Scheme based on Government Instructions and prior judgments of this Court. The Court disposed of the petition by directing the respondent authority to treat the case as a comprehensive representation, pass a reasoned order after a hearing within six weeks, and grant reliefs forthwith if petitioners are entitled.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondent authority to treat the petition as a comprehensive representation, afford hearing, and pass a reasoned speaking order within six weeks.

Vijay Shankar Sharma and Others Vs… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Punjab & Haryana HC (2026)

¶1

¶2

CWP-29566-2026

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

110 CWP-29566-2026 Date of Decision: 11.09.2026

¶5

Vijay Shankar Sharma and others

¶6

....Petitioners

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

State of Haryana and others

¶9

….Respondents

¶10

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARPREET SINGH BRAR

¶11

Present : Mr. Rajat Mor and Mr. Vishesh Dhaka, Advocates for the petitioners.

¶12

Mr. Naveen Singh Panwar, DAG Haryana.

¶13

HARPREET SINGH BRAR, J. (Oral)

¶14

This civil writ petition has been filed under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India for seeking issuance of an appropriate writ, order or direction, especially a writ in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondents to consider the petitioners under the Old Pension Scheme (GPF Scheme) in terms of Government Instructions dated 08.05.2023 (Annexure P-5) and in view of the judgment dated 24.08.2026 (Annexure P-9) passed by this Court in the bunch of writ petitions led by CWP No. 10970 of 2025 as well as other judicial precedents rendered in cases of similarly situated employees, along with all consequential benefits, including arrears and pensionary/retiral benefits, from the date the same became due.

¶15

Learned counsel for the petitioners, inter alia, contends that the petitioners applied for various posts advertised vide Advertisement

¶16

PARUL VERMA 2026.09.11 14:30 I attest the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment

¶17

¶18

CWP-29566-2026

¶19

No.1/05 dated 21.06.2005 and Advertisement No.2/05 dated 14.12.2005 (Annexures P-1 and P-2, respectively) issued by the respondentUniversity prior to 28.10.2005. The claim of the petitioners is squarely covered by the Office Memorandum dated 08.05.2023 (Annexure P-5) extending one-time option for coverage under the Old Pension Scheme to the employees appointed against posts advertised prior to 28.10.2005 but appointed on or after 01.01.2006. The respondent-University issued notification on 13.06.2023 (Annexure P-6) adopting the Government instructions and inviting eligible employees to exercise the option. The petitioners submitted their options within the stipulated time. The respondent-University forwarded the claim of the petitioners and other similar situated employees to the Government of Haryana as is discernible from Annexure P-8. He further submits that the claim of the petitioners is squarely covered by judgments rendered by this Court in Suresh Kumar vs. State of Haryana and others, CWP-10970-2025 , decided on 24.08.2026 (Annexure P-9) and Om Parkash vs. State of Haryana and others , CWP-20263-2024 decided on 09.07.2026.

¶20

Learned counsel for the petitioners has limited his prayer to the extent that the present petition be treated as a comprehensive representation and the same be decided by respondent No.1/competent authority in the light of judgments rendered by this Court in Suresh Kumar (supra) and Om Parkash (supra) in a time-bound manner, by passing a speaking order after affording the petitioners an opportunity of being heard.

¶21

PARUL VERMA 2026.09.11 14:30 I attest the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment

¶22

¶23

CWP-29566-2026

¶24

Upon advance notice, learned State counsel appears on behalf of the respondent-State and submits that the grievance raised by the petitioners in the present writ petition would be considered by passing a reasoned speaking order in accordance with the law by respondent No.1/competent authority.

¶25

In view of the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the present writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent No.1/competent authority to treat the present writ petition as a comprehensive representation and to consider the claim of the petitioners

¶26

in the light of Suresh Kumar (supra) and Om Parkash (supra) . A reasoned and speaking order shall be passed after affording the petitioners an opportunity of hearing within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.

¶27

Further, the decision taken thereof shall be conveyed to the petitioners. Needless to say, if the petitioners are found entitled to the relief sought, the same shall be granted forthwith by the respondent No.1/competent authority.

¶28

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

¶29

11.09.2026 (HARPREET SINGH BRAR) parul verma JUDGE

¶30

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

¶31

PARUL VERMA 2026.09.11 14:30 I attest the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment

Vijay Shankar Sharma and Others v. 1STATE of Haryana and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vijay Shankar Sharma and Others v. 1STATE 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