Moti Lal v. Punjab And Haryana High Court And Another

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH 117 + 125 (I) CWP-35811-2025 Date of Decision : January 19, 2026 MOTI LAL -PETITIONER V/S PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AND ANOTHER -RESPONDENTS (II) CWP-37935-2025 ANIL KUMAR -PETITIONER V/S THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AND ANOTHER -RESPONDENTS (III) CWP-38011-2025 AMIT KUMAR -PETITIONER V/S PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AND ANOTHER -RESPONDENTS (IV) CWP-38288-2025 VICKY -PETITIONER V/S THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AND ANOTHER -RESPONDENTS

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP TIWARI

Present:

Ms. Harmeet Kaur Chanan, Advocate, and Ms. Amandeep Kaur, Advocate for the petitioners.

Mr. Kanwal Goyal, Advocate, and Mr. Amit Kumar, Advocate, and Ms. Sheena Dahiya, Advocate for the respondent No.2.

CWP-35811-2025 and connected cases KULDEEP TIWARI, J. (ORAL) 1.

All these writ petitions are amenable for being decided through a common verdict on account of theirs clothing a common issue appertaining to regularization.

2.

The petitioners' claim for regularization was rejected by the competent authority on multiple grounds, the principal ground being that the petitioners had been relieved from service on 30.06.2022, i.e. prior to submission of their claim for regularization. 3.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that subsequent to the passing of the impugned orders, there has been a material change in circumstances owing to the framing of a regularization policy dated 25.12.2025 by the Punjab and Haryana High Court. It is, therefore, contended that, at this stage, the petitioners restrict their prayer to the issuance of a direction to the District and Sessions Judge concerned to reconsider their claim for regularization in the light of the policy (supra). 4.

Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.2 submits that the petitioners do not fall within the ambit of the policy (supra), as they have not completed the requisite ten years of service. It is further submitted that the petitioners were relieved from service as far back as the year 2022 and, therefore, no question of regularization of their services arises.

5.

This Court specifically queried learned counsel for the respondent No.2 as to whether the case of the petitioners had been examined by the competent authority in the light of the policy (supra), to which he fairly concedes that no such exercise has been undertaken, as the impugned

CWP-35811-2025 and connected cases orders were passed prior to the framing of the regularization policy by the Punjab and Haryana High Court.

6.

Be that as it may, at this stage, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the petitioners' claim, a direction is issued to the competent authority to reconsider the petitioners' claim for regularization in accordance with the regularization policy (supra). The said exercise shall be completed within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order, after affording due opportunity of hearing to the petitioners.

7.

All these writ petitions stand disposed of accordingly. 8.

A photocopy of this order be placed on file of each connected case.

(KULDEEP TIWARI) January 19, 2026 JUDGE devinder Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether Reportable :

Yes/No