High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCWP/15859/2026disposed of

Shyam Lal v. Haryana Agro Industries Corporation Limited And Others

2026-05-20Mr. Justice Harpreet Singh Brar4 pages

"# $% &

" ' (&

) &

" " !

"# $% &

" ' (& "# $%"

* % # % + ", & * #+ ",

& ----

&' ()*+ 1.

With the consent of all the parties, the aforementioned writ petitions are taken up together and are being decided by this common judgment. However, for the sake of brevity, the facts are taken from CWP 15859-2026.

The present petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India with a prayer for issuance of an appropriate writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to regularize the services of the petitioners on the post of Security Guard with all consequential benefits under regularization policy dated 18.06.2014, Annexure P-4, in the interest of justice. 3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner, inter alia, contends that the petitioner was retrenched from service by the respondents. Subsequently, a compromise was arrived at between the parties before the Labour Court, Ambala, which culminated into an award dated 31.01.2008 (Annexure P-1), whereby the petitioner agreed to join service afresh on DC rates while foregoing his claim towards back wages. Pursuant thereto, the petitioner submitted an application dated 01.02.2008 before respondent No.3 seeking permission to join duty (Annexure P-2). Thereafter, vide order dated 07.03.2008, respondent No.3 permitted the petitioner to join duty and reinstated him as Security Guard on daily wage basis w.e.f. 01.02.2008 at Farmers Service Centre, Kaithal (Annexure P-3). It is further contended that the State of Haryana framed a regularization policy dated 18.06.2014 (Annexure P-4) for

regularization of Group 'C' and 'D' employees/workers engaged on contract basis. In view thereof, the petitioner served a legal notice dated 17.03.2026 (Annexure P-5) upon the respondents seeking regularization of his services under the aforesaid policy and in the light of the judgment dated 31.12.2025 passed in Joginder vs. State of Haryana. However, despite service of the aforesaid legal notice, the respondents have failed to take any decision regarding regularization of the petitioner's services. /

& 01

& 2 & & 3

& , &

# judgment rendered by Hon'ble Supreme Court in Madan Singh vs. State of Haryana, 2026 SCC OnLine SC 628, 3 & #

& 4#

# & 01

&& % 3#

* #+ ", +

&& #

, + %3 # ,

3 & & 5 & 5% 3 3 & #

& 4#

3 &016 &

% 7 + ,5 %3

& + & 5 &

& 86 &

% 5 &

& , &

& 01

# judgment rendered by Hon'ble Supreme Court in Madan Singh (supra)

& 4#

&& % 3 + 5

receiving a certified copy of this order. Further, the decision taken thereof shall be conveyed to the petitioner(s). Needless to say, if the petitioner(s) are found entitled to the relief sought, the same shall be granted forthwith by the respondents.

&& +

& & 3 &

& 4#6 968 (&

968