OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-20708-2026 CWP Krishan Lal Krishan Lal & Ors. v. State of Haryana State of Haryana & Ors.

Judgment

#1. Present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of etition under Article 226 of the Constitution of for issuance of a writ in the nature India has been filed by the petitioners for issuance of a writ in the nature for issuance of a writ in the nature India has been filed by the petitioner of Mandamus andamus directing the respondents to consider the cla m of the directing the respondents to consider the claim of the petitioners for regularization of their services in light of the policy of their services in light of the policy decision dated 18.06.2014 (Annexure P decision dated from the date of the (Annexure P-3) or from the date of the juniors/similar situated employees of the petitioners have been regularized juniors/similar situated employees of the petitioners have been regularized juniors/similar situated employees of the petitioners have been regularized juniors/similar situated employees of the petitioners have been regularized and also to grant all consequential benefits and also to grant all etc.

#2. It is inter alia submitted by learned submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners rs were appointed as Ward Servants and that the petitioners were appointed as Ward Servants and Sweepers in the years 2009 and 2010 as detailed in para No. 2 of the Sweepers in the years 2009 and 2010 as detailed in para No. 2 of the Sweepers in the years 2009 and 2010 as detailed in para No. 2 of the petition, in the office of respondent No in the office of respondent Nos. 3 and 4 . 3 and 4. The names of the petitioners were sponsored/forwarded by the Employment Exchange. petitioners were sponsored/forwarded by the Employment Exchange. petitioners were sponsored/forwarded by the Employment Exchange. ervices of the petitioners were terminated vide order dated However, services of the petitioners were terminated vide order dated However, s

#13. The petitioners have challenged the aforesaid termination 31.01.2013. The petitioners have challenged the aforesaid termination 13. The petitioners have challenged the aforesaid termination before the In pursuance of different Awards Labour Court, concerned. In pursuance of different Awards CWP-20708 20708-2026 -2- passed by the Labour Court concerned (as detailed in para passed by the Labour Court concerned (as detailed in para No. 3 of the directing the respondents to re-instate the petitioners with directing the respondents to re petition) directing the respondents to re immediate effect with all consequential benefits for back wages; all the immediate effect with all consequential benefits for back wages immediate effect with all consequential benefits for back wages petitioners were re-instated on 31.01.2013 petitioners were re 13; and since then, petitioners are continuing on the said post without break or any complaint. continuing on the said post without break or any complaint.

#3. In the meantime, the respondent State had issued the Policy In the meantime, the respondent State had issue dated 18.06.2014 (Annexure P-3), whereby dated 18.06.2014 (Annexure P whereby it was decided that all Group ‘C’ and Group ‘D’ employees who have completed 3 years of service ‘C’ and Group ‘D’ employees who have completed 3 years of service ‘C’ and Group ‘D’ employees who have completed 3 years of service are entitled for regularization. It is submitted that as upto 28.05.2014, are entitled for regularization. It is submitted that as upto 28.05.2014, petitioners have joined in the years 2009 and 2010 in the years 2009 and 2010 as Ward Servants and Sweepers, , they are entitled to regularization regularization as per aforesaid Policy (Annexure P-4). In this regard, the petitioner (Annexure P . In this regard, the petitioners have also served Legal Notice dated dated 01.06.2026 (Annexure P-5) upon the 5) upon the respondents to . However, in the meantime, the consider their case for regularization. However, in the meantime, the consider th Policy dated 18.06.2014 (Annexure P-4) Policy dated 4) was challenged before this Court by way of CWP-17206-2014 titled as Court by way of as Yogesh Tyagi and another . Vide judgment dated 31.05.2018, the vs. State of Haryana and others. Vide judgment dated 31.05.2018, the vs. State of Haryana and others above said Policy was quashed by this Court above said Polic quashed by this Court inter alia on the ground violated the dictum of the Constitutional Bench that said Policy violated the dictum of the Constitutional Bench that said tary, State of Karnataka vs. Uma Devi judgment passed in Secretary, State of Karnataka vs. Uma Devi judgment passed in