← Library
High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCWP/11195/2015disposed of

Suresh Kumar And ANR. v. State Of Haryana And ORS.

2026-05-22Mr. Justice Tribhuvan Dahiya2 pages

CWP-11195-2015

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH Sr. No.209 CWP-11195-2015 Date of Decision: 22.05.2026 Suresh Kumar and another .... Petitioners

Versus

State of Haryana and others ... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA

Present:

Mr. Sandeep Thakan, Advocate for the petitioners.

Mr. Amit Sahni, Additional Advocate General, Haryana assisted by Mr. Harmanjit Singh Johal, Advocate. TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA, J. (ORAL) The petition has been filed seeking regularisation of the petitioners in service, who are working as Group-D employees in the Department.

2.

Learned counsel contended that in terms of the latest decision of the Supreme Court, dated 16.04.2026, rendered in Madan Singh and others v. State of Haryana and others, 2026 INSC 379, the petitioners are entitled to regularisation under the Government notification dated 18.06.2014. At this stage, they will be satisfied in case they are permitted to make an appropriate representation before the respondents raising the said grievance, which may be ordered to be decided within a specified period. All relevant particulars of the petitioners' services which entitle them to the claimed benefit will be mentioned therein.

3.

Learned State counsel submits that in case any such representation is filed by the petitioners within four weeks from today, the MEHAK HURIA 2026.05.26 10:56 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment same will be decided by respondent no.2 - Director, Technical Education, by

CWP-11195-2015 passing a speaking order thereupon in accordance with law in the light of Madan Singh case ibid., within six months of receiving the representation. 4.

In view of the statement made, learned counsel for the petitioners have no objection to the petition being disposed of in terms thereof.

5.

Ordered accordingly.

6.

In case the order is not passed within the stipulated period, the officer concerned shall pay costs of `50,000 to the petitioners. (TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA) JUDGE 22.05.2026 Mehak Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether reportable :

Yes/No MEHAK HURIA 2026.05.26 10:56 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment