← Library
High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCWP/27284/2025disposed of

Rakesh Kumar v. State Of Punjab Through Secretary To Governmen

2025-09-12Mr. Justice Harpreet Singh Brar3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CWP-27284-2025 (O&M) Date of decision: 12.09.2025 Rakesh Kumar ....Petitioner

Versus

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

Present:

Mr. Vishesh Bhatia, Advocate for Mr. Viranjeet Singh Mahal, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Vikas Arora, DAG, Punjab.

HARPREET SINGH BRAR J. (Oral) 1.

Prayer in this writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus, directing the respondents to decide the representation dated 14.08.2025 (Annexure P-3) sent by the petitioner to respondent No.2 and to regularize the services of the petitioner, in pursuance to the policy dated 16.05.2023 (Annexure P-2) and to pay minimum of the pay-scale + dearness allowance + grade pay to the petitioner along with arrears.

2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that earlier the petitioner has filed CWP No.34092 of 2024, inadvertently against the Department of Forest, Government of Punjab, whereas the claim of the petitioner is required to be considered by respondent No.2 i.e. Punjab

Urban Development Authority through its Chief Secretary, PUDA Bhawan, S.A.S. Nagar, Mohali. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the petitioner, having worked continuously for over two decades, has a legitimate expectation and needs to be regularized in service as per the State Government's own policies. He further submits that the case of the petitioner is squarely covered by the Division Bench judgment of this Court in State of Punjab and others vs Sarwan Ram and others, 2025 NCPHHC 65364. Lastly, he submits that he would be satisfied if the representation dated 14.08.2025 (Annexure P-3) of the petitioner is decided by respondent No.2 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 the respondent No.2 for time-bound consideration and decision of the representation dated 14.08.2025 (Annexure P-3) of the petitioner by passing a speaking order.

4.

Therefore, in view of the limited prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner, respondent No.2 is directed to consider the representation dated 14.08.2025 (Annexure P-3) of the petitioner and pass a speaking order, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, 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 petitioner. Needless to say, if the petitioner is found

entitled to the relief sought, the same shall be granted forthwith by respondent No.2.

5.

Disposed of, accordingly.

(HARPREET SINGH BRAR) JUDGE 12.09.2025 yakub Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether reportable:

Yes/No