Manjeet Singh v. State Of Punjab, Through Its Secretary

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: 21.05.2026 Manjeet Singh Saini ....Petitioner

VERSUS

State of Punjab and others

...Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARPREET SINGH BRAR Present :

Mr. Rajat Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Pratibha Bali, AAG Punjab.

Mr. Ranjit Singh Kalra with Ms. Mona Yadav and Ms. Apurva Walia, Advocates for respondents No.2 and 3.

HARPREET SINGH BRAR, J. (Oral) 1.

The present writ petition has been filed under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the impugned order dated 04.10.2019 (Annexure P17) whereby claim of petitioner for regularization on the post of Driver has been wrongly rejected by respondent No.2. Further praying for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to regularize the service of petitioner on the post of Driver w.e.f. 26.04.2011 along with all service benefits connected with respective posts. Further praying for

directing the respondents to decide the claim of petitioner in view of judgment dated 19.11.2025 passed in CWP-6757-2020 (Annexure P-18) of similarly situated employees by decide the representation dated 09.04.2026 (Annexure P-19) in a time bound manner.

2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner at this stage submits that he would be satisfied if a direction is issued to the respondent No.2 to decide the representation dated 09.04.2026 (Annexure P-19) by passing a speaking order in a time bound manner in terms of judgment rendered by this Court in CWP-6757-2020, Kuldeep Kumar Versus State of Punjab and others, decided on 19.11.2025 (Annexure P-18).

3.

On advance notice, Ms. Pratibha Bali, Assistant Advocate General accepts notice on behalf of respondents-State, whereas, Mr. Ranjit Kalra, Advocate put in appearance on behalf of respondents No.2 and 3 submits that they have no objection in case a direction is issued to the respondent No.2/competent authority to hear and decide the 09.04.2026 (Annexure P-19) by passing a speaking order in a time bound manner in terms of judgment passed in Kuldeep Kumar (supra). 4.

In view of the limited prayer made by counsel for the petitioner without commenting upon the merits of the case, the present petition is disposed of and the respondent No.2/competent authority is directed to hear and decide the representation dated 09.04.2026 (Annexure P-19) by passing a speaking order in a time bound manner in terms of judgment rendered in

Kuldeep Kumar (supra), within a period of three months from the date of receiving a certified copy of this order. Further the decision taken thereof shall be conveyed to the petitioner.

5.

Needless to say, if the petitioner is found entitled to the relief sought, the same be granted forthwith by respondent/competent authority. 6.

Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stands disposed of.

(HARPREET SINGH BRAR) JUDGE 21.05.2026 Puneet Chawla Whether speaking/reasoned. : Yes/No Whether Reportable. :

Yes/No