Suresh Kumar v. State Of Haryana And Others

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: 25.05.2026 SURESH KUMAR

...Petitioner

Versus

STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS

...Respondents

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

Present:

Mr. Arun Kumar Goyat, Advocate for the petitioner.

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

Mr. Prince Singh, Advocate for respondent No.3. HARPREET SINGH BRAR , J. (ORAL) 1.

The present petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to implement the grant of two additional increments to the petitioner, which were recommended in the year 2004-05 (Annexure P-1) and approved by the department vide Office Order No. 356/CE/Admn. dated 07.11.2007 (Annexure P-3), but have not been released to him till date.

2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner, inter alia, contends that the petitioner is an employee of Haryana Power Generation Corporation Limited (HPGCL) and an outstanding Kabaddi player. He represented India in the 6th South Asian Federation (SAF) Games held in Bangladesh in the year 1993 and won a Silver Medal. Further, from the year 1991 to 2012, he won

-2four Gold Medals and seven Silver Medals at the national level while representing the respondent-Department. On account of petitioner's outstanding sports achievements, the Sports Screening Committee recommended the grant of two additional increments to him for the year 2004-05 (Annexure P-1). Thereafter, vide Office Order No. 356/CE/Admn. dated 07.11.2007 (Annexure P-3), the department also approved the grant of two additional increments to the petitioner. However, despite the aforesaid approval, the said increments have not been released to the petitioner till date. Learned counsel further submits that other sportspersons, whose names recommended with the petitioner for such incentives in the year 2004-05, have already been granted the same, as is evident from Annexures P-4 to P6. It is further submitted that the petitioner made several representations to the department, including representations dated 16.12.2011 (Annexure P-7), in the year 2011 (Annexure P-8) and most recently on 23.03.2026 (Annexure P-9), but no action has been taken thereupon. 3.

Learned counsel for respondent No.3, on instructions from Mr. Ashish Dhull, Executive Engineer, submits that the petitioner was granted the aforesaid increments on account of his sports achievements. However, he is not in a position to justify as to why, despite the passing of order during the years 2005-2007, the same has not been implemented by extending the consequential financial benefits to the petitioner. He further submits that the said order shall be implemented within a period of two weeks. 4.

In view of the statement made by learned counsel for the respondent No.3-department, the present petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to implement the order granting two additional

-3increments to the petitioner and to release all consequential arrears arising therefrom within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. However, the petitioner shall not be entitled to any interest on the delayed payment.

5.

Disposed of accordingly.

(HARPREET SINGH BRAR) JUDGE May 25, 2026 Nisha-1 Whether speaking/reasoned Yes Whether reportable No