← Library
High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCWP/18650/2026disposed of

Mahipal And Others v. State Of Haryana And Others

2026-07-01Mr. Justice Harpreet Singh Brar3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: 01.07.2026 Mahipal and others .....Petitioner

VERSUS

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

Mr. Bhupinder Malik, Advocate for the petitioners.

Mr. Harish Nain, Advocate for the respondents.

***** HARPREET SINGH BRAR, J.

1.

The present writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of an appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to regularize the services of the petitioners either under the policy dated 27.02.2004 (Annexure P12) or to frame a new regularization policy for the petitioners in the light of judgments of Hon'ble the Supreme Court. Further prayer has been made to engage the petitioners on full time basis till they are regularized. 2.

Learned counsel for the petitioners, inter alia, contends that the petitioners were engaged as part-time Sweepers in Government schools/offices since 2007-2008 on the recommendation of Employment Exchange/SMC and

they have been working for the last 17-18 years. Learned counsel further submits that despite the policies dated 11.11.2003 (Annexure P11) and 27.02.2004 (Annexure P12) provide for regularization of part-time Group-D employees on completion of six years' service, however, the petitioners' claim for regularization of their services has not been considered. Learned counsel further submits that the State government has issued instructions for regularization of part-time Group-D employees, who have completed five years' service on the date of issuance of the said instructions, as discernible from Annexure P8. At this stage, petitioners would be satisfied if a direction is issued to respondent No.2 to decide legal notice dated 20.04.2026 (Annexure P27) by passing a speaking order in a time bound manner.

3.

Notice of motion.

4.

Mr. Harish Nain, Deputy Advocate General, Haryana, who is present in Court on advance notice, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents and submits that he has no objection in case a direction is issued to respondent No.2 to hear and decide the decide legal notice dated 20.04.2026 (Annexure P27).

5.

In view of the limited prayer made by counsel for the petitioners without commenting upon the merits of the case, the present petition is disposed of and respondent No.2 is directed to hear and decide the decide legal notice dated 20.04.2026 (Annexure P27), filed by the petitioners in a time bound manner and pass a speaking order, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.

6.

Needless to say, if the petitioners are found entitled to the relief sought, the same be granted to them forthwith by respondents/competent authority.

( HARPREET SINGH BRAR ) July 01 , 2026.

JUDGE 'om'

Whether speaking/reasoned. :

Yes/No Whether Reportable. :

Yes/No