Ajay Kumar Walia And Others v. State Of Haryana And Others

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CWP-13801-2026 (O&M) Date of decision: 05.05.2026 Ajay Kumar Walia and others ....Petitioners

Versus

State of Haryana and others ....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARPREET SINGH BRAR

Present:

Mr. Karamveer Singh Banyana, Advocate for the petitioners.

Mr. Vikrant Pamboo, Addl. A.G., Haryana.

HARPREET SINGH BRAR J. (Oral) 1.

Prayer in this writ petition filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, is for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari, for quashing the promotion order dated 16.05.2025 (Annexure P-4) vide which the juniors of the petitioners i.e. respondents No.3 and 4, have been promoted on the post of Executive Officer and further to quash the orders dated 31.12.2025 (Annexure P-5) and 31.12.2025 (Annexure P-6) vide which respondents No.5 and 6 have been posted as Executive Officers on deputation in violation of the Rules. Further a writ of mandamus has been sought, directing the respondents to promote the petitioners on the post of Executive Officer w.e.f. 16.05.2025 from the date their juniors have been promoted on the post of Executive Officer along with all consequential benefits.

2.

Learned counsel for the petitioners, inter alia, contends that promoting juniors while ignoring the eligible petitioners violates Article 14 of the Constitution of India. Further, filling posts by deputation when the Rules provide that the posts can only be filled either through direct recruitment or promotion. Feeling aggrieved against the action of the respondents, the petitioner submitted representations dated 05.12.2025 (Annexure P-7) and dated 30.01.2026 (Annexure P-8), which remain undecided till date. Learned counsel for the petitioners, at this stage, submits that he would be satisfied if the instant writ petition of the petitioners is treated as a comprehensive representation and the same be decided by respondent No.1 by passing a speaking order in a time bound manner.

3.

Learned State counsel, appearing on advance notice, submits that he has no objection, in case a direction is issued to respondent No.1 for time-bound consideration and decision thereof by passing a speaking order.

4.

Therefore, in view of the limited prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioners, the respondent No.1 is directed to treat this writ petition as a comprehensive representation and consider the case of the petitioners and pass a speaking order, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners, within a period of 03 months from the date of receiving a certified copy of this order. 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 respondent No.1.

5.

Disposed of, accordingly.

(HARPREET SINGH BRAR) JUDGE 05.05.2026 yakub Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether reportable:

Yes/No