Disposed¶16

Gurjant Singh and Others v. State of Punjab and Others

Punjab & Haryana HC27 Mar 2026CWP/9190/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Keywords: leave encashment; daily wage/work-charged employees; regularization; legal notice (Annexure P-7); direction to competent respondent to decide within four weeks; disposal at threshold without opinion on merits; consent/no-objection disposal; State of Punjab; Sikander Singh (CWP-19425-2017, decided 10.02.2025); LPA-2136-2025 (decided 21.08.2025); Kuldeep Tiwari, J.; Punjab and Haryana High Court; CWP-9190-2026 and connected cases.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the competent respondent to consider and take a final decision on the legal notices (Annexure P-7) within four weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of the order; writ petitions disposed of at the threshold without expressing any opinion on the merits. ¶16

Gurjant Singh and Others Vs State of Punjab and Others — Punjab & Haryana HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶16

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioners are entitled to a direction to the respondents to release the benefit of leave encashment by counting their entire service rendered on a daily wage/work-charged basis, followed by regularization. +1 more

¶8

Court's answer

All these writ petitions are amenable to being decided through a common verdict because they seek a common relief regarding leave encashment based on service rendered on a daily wage/work-charged basis followed by regularization, in view of the law laid down in Sikander Singh (CWP-19425-2017), upheld in LPA-2136-2025.

¶8

Ratio / Principle

The writ petitions are disposed of at the threshold, without expressing any opinion on the merits, with a direction to the competent respondent to consider and take a final decision on the legal notices (Annexure P-7).

¶11

Key takeaways

The competent respondent must take the final decision on the legal notices within four weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.ratio¶15

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Punjab and Haryana (Kuldeep Tiwari, J., Oral), March 27, 2026 — Five connected writ petitions (CWP-9190-2026, CWP-9220-2026, CWP-9292-2026, CWP-9300-2026, CWP-9305-2026; Gurjant Singh, Narinder Singh, Lakha Singh, Mukesh Kumar and Manmohan Singh and others vs. State of Punjab and others) sought directions to release leave encashment benefits by counting the petitioners' entire service rendered on a daily wage/work-charged basis followed by regularization, invoking the law laid down by this Court in CWP-19425-2017 (Sikander Singh vs. State of Punjab and others, decided 10.02.2025), upheld by a Division Bench in LPA-2136-2025 (decided 21.08.2025). At the hearing, counsel for the petitioners confined the prayer to a direction that the competent respondent decide the pending legal notices (Annexure P-7); the State, represented by AAG Sahil R. Bakshi, raised no objection. The Court held the petitions amenable to a common verdict and disposed of them at the threshold without expressing any opinion on the merits, directing the competent respondent to consider and take a final decision on the legal notices within four weeks from receipt of a certified copy of the order.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

109 CWP-9190-2026 Date of Decision : March 27, 2026 GURJANT SINGH AND OTHERS -PETITIONERS V/S STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS -RESPONDENTS 112 CWP-9220-2026 NARINDER SINGH AND OTHERS -PETITIONERS V/S STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS -RESPONDENTS 114 CWP-9292-2026 LAKHA SINGH AND OTHERS -PETITIONERS V/S STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS -RESPONDENTS 115 CWP-9300-2026 MUKESH KUMAR AND OTHERS -PETITIONERS V/S STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS -RESPONDENTS 117 CWP-9305-2026 MANMOHAN SINGH AND OTHERS -PETITIONERS V/S STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS -RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP TIWARI Present: Mr. Baljeet Singh Sidhu, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Sahil R. Bakshi, A.A.G., Punjab.

¶3

¶4

DEVINDER YADAV 2026.03.27 14:03 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment

¶5

CWP-9190-2026 and connected cased

¶6

¶7

KULDEEP TIWARI, J. (ORAL)

¶8

All these writ petitions are amenable for being decided through a common verdict on account of their seeking a common relief pertaining to the issuance of directions to the respondents to release the benefit of leave encashment to the petitioners by counting the entire service rendered by them on a daily wage/work-charged basis, followed by regularization, in view of the law laid down by this Court in CWP-19425-2017 (Sikander Singh vs. State of Punjab and others), decided on 10.02.2025 , which has been upheld by a Division Bench of this Court in LPA-2136-2025, decided on 21.08.2025.

¶9

During the course of arguments, learned counsel for the petitioners fairly submits that, at this stage, the petitioners would be satisfied in case a direction is issued to the competent respondent to decide the legal notices, which have been appended as Annexure P-7 in all these writ petitions, within a stipulated time period.

¶10

Mr. Sahil R. Bakshi, A.A.G., Punjab, who is in receipt of advance copies of the writ petitions and represents the respondents, submits that there is no objection in case a direction is issued to the competent respondent to decide the legal notices ( supra ) within a stipulated time period.

¶11

In view of the aforesaid submissions, these writ petitions are disposed of at the threshold, without expressing any opinion on the merits thereof, with a direction to the competent respondent, amongst the respondents, to consider and take a final decision on legal notices ( supra )

¶12

DEVINDER YADAV 2026.03.27 14:03 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment

¶13

¶14

CWP-9190-2026 and connected cased

¶15

within four weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.

¶16

5. Disposed of accordingly.

¶17