Hema Sharma And ORS v. Punjab University Chandigarh
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH **** 804-1 Date of Decision: 10.09.2025 HEMA SHARMA AND ORS.
...Petitioners
Versus
PUNJAB UNIVERSITY
...Respondent
And Sr.
No.
Case No.
Petitioner(s) Respondent(s) 2.
CWP-11893-2013 Renu Garg And Ors.
Panjab University, Chd. and Ors.
3.
CWP-9142-2013 (O&M) Taru Verma and Ors.
Panjab University, Chd. and Anr.
4.
CWP-19269-2014 Puja Rai And Ors.
Panjab University, Chd. and Anr.
CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGMOHAN BANSAL Present:- Mr. Ishan Bhardwaj, Advocate for the petitioners (in CWP-11783-2013) Ms. Sukhmanjot Kaur, Advocate for Mr. Brajesh Mittal, Advocate for petitioner (in CWP-11893-2013 and CWP-9142-2013) None for the respondents **** JAGMOHAN BANSAL, J. (ORAL) 1.
As common issues are involved in the captioned petitions, with the consent of both sides, the same are hereby disposed of by this common order. For the sake of brevity and convenience, facts are borrowed from CWP-11783-2013.
2.
The petitioners through instant petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India are seeking setting aside of order
-2dated 23.05.2023 (Annexure P-2) whereby they were relieved from duty. 3.
On 16.07.2013 following order was passed:- "In this group of petitions, the petitioners were appointed as Library Assistants on contract basis from 2001 till 2009. Some of them had filed C.W.P. No.8820 of 2006 which was admitted and an interim order was granted whereby their services could not be dispensed with except by way of appointment on regular basis. There are others appointed after 2006 who did not file any petition and have no such interim order. Now in the year 2013 the University has filled up 30 Posts of Library Assistants, Deputy Librarian and Librarian on regular basis and have terminated the services of all the contractual employees.
In my opinion the interim order mentioned above will protect persons in excess of 30 posts who were appointed against posts of Library Assistants, Deputy Librarians and Librarians and the services of Library Assistants in excess of 30 would have to be protected on the principle of last come first go. Let the respondent give a specific reply on this point on or before 26th July, 2013. Consequently, services of those petitioners in excess of 30, who are still working against vacant posts of Library Assistants, Deputy Librarian and Librarian are protected till the next date of hearing.
Adjourned to 26th July, 2013.
Copy of this order be supplied to learned counsel for the respondent under the signatures of Court Secretary."
4.
The aforesaid order was followed by order dated 26.07.2013 which reads as:- "Affidavit filed on behalf of the respondentUniversity is taken on record in which it has been mentioned that the petitioners would be re-appointed initially for a period of 89 days or till the regular selection
-3is made, which is earlier.
Learned counsel for the petitioners states that to the above said extent the relief has been granted but there is a residual issue viz., the fact that the petitioners' services were dispensed with on 25.05.2013 and from the stand of the respondents-University taken today it is clear that they have accepted the fact that the services have been wrongly terminated. In the circumstances as per the learned counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners cannot be deprived of the salary for the period from 25.05.2013 till the time they are re-appointed.
Learned counsel for the respondent-University has however argued that in this respect the petitioners now cannot be given any salary at the principle 'No Work No Pay'.
In the circumstances, with regard to the claim of the petitioners for the period they remained out of service the petition is admitted."
5.
Mr. Bhardwaj, Advocate submits that six petitioners are not willing to pursue the matter. He has not received instructions from other petitioners.
6.
By above-quoted interim orders, the petitioners were protected and they continued to work. No further order is warranted. 7.
Disposed of.
8.
Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of. (JAGMOHAN BANSAL) JUDGE 10.09.2025 Deepak DPA Whether Speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether Reportable:
Yes/No