State of Hary nti, Haryana & Ors. v. Damyanti, decided o ded on

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJ CORAM: HO HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEP HO SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA DEEPINDER SINGH NALWA **** Present: M Mr. Vivek Chauhan, Addl. A.G., H .G., Haryana. SANJEEV PR ral) V PRAKASH SHARMA, J.(Oral) ****

#1. Present sent appeal is an offshoot of the f the cases relating to claim of regulariz ularization under the 2003 policy.

#2. In the bu bunch of appeals preferred by the PA by the State with lead case of LPA No.105 o 05 of 2025 titled as ‘State of Hary nti, Haryana and other vs. Damyanti, decided o ded on 14.05.2025, we have passed th ssed the following order: “1. All these matters relate elate to the issue on two aspects, one is with regard to gran rant of the benefit of Old Pension Scheme to the writ-petitio Pe titioners and the other is with regard to giving them the be e benefit of regularization Policy dated 01.10.2003 without con Po t considering whether they have worked for 240 days in eac each of the three years preceding the date of Policy.

#2. Relying on the law, a Divisi ivision Bench of this Court passed an order in LPA No.2356 356 of 2024 decided on

26.09.2024 titled as “State of Ha 26 Haryana and others vs. Sher Singh” holding Sh the conce oncerned writ-petitioners entitled for the benefit as claimed by d by them noticed above.

#3. However, we have taken no n note of the fact that with regard to the same set of cases ases, certain SLPs were preferred before the Supreme Court ourt one of them is Special MOHIT GOYAL 2025.05.27 18:07 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document LPA-1618-2025 025 (O&M) Leave to Appeal (C) No.112/2025 Le 2025 tilted as “State of Haryana & Ors. vs. Sushil” and the Ha d the other is having Diary No.56458/2024 whereas in the mea No meantime, the Apex Court stayed the operation and effect o ct of the judgment. We, therefore, are of the view that we we should await the final judgment to be rendered by Hon’ble ’ble the Supreme Court in these cases and the present appeals eals, which many of them are highly belated, need not be kept p ept pending before us.

#4. Accordingly, we dispose of se of all these appeals with observations that whatever is the fin e final verdict rendered by Hon’ble the Supreme Court in SL Ho n SLP No.112/2025 shall govern the fate to all the responde ondents herein. It is made clear that till disposal of the s said SLP, no contempt proceedings would be initiated ed on account of non- implementation of the order of the le e learned Single Judge. At the same time, the claim of the writ writ-petitioners would also not be frustrated if the order is ulti ultimately passed against the State by Hon’ble the Supreme Co e Court.

#5. All the pending misc. appli application(s) in each case also stand disposed of.”

#3. In view o view of the above, present appeal stand stands disposed of. The order passed above sha ove shall apply mutatis mutandis to the to the instant case.

#4. All pendi l pending applications also stand dispose disposed of accordingly. (SANJE ANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA) JUDGE DEEPINDER SINGH NALWA) (DEEP JUDGE

27.05.2025 Mohit goyal

#1. Whether s 2. Whether r er speaking/reasoned? er reportable? Ye Yes/No Yes/No Ye MOHIT GOYAL 2025.05.27 18:07 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document