STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS v. SARWAN RAM AND OTHERS
Case Details
LPA-2032-2024 (O&M) & other connected matters -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Reserved On: 05.05.2025 Pronounced On: 16.05.2025 1. LPA-2032-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus SARWAN RAM AND OTHERS 2. LPA-2073-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus SOHAN SINGH 3. LPA-2088-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus SHANO DEVI 4. LPA-2111-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus TEHAL SINGH 5. LPA-2112-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS KULDEEP SINGH Versus HIMANSHU 2025.05.26 12:28 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. ……Appellants …..Respondents ……Appellants …..Respondent ……Appellants …..Respondent ……Appellants …..Respondent ……Appellants …..Respondent LPA-2032-2024 (O&M) & other connected matters -2- 6. LPA-2114-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus MOHINDER SINGH AND OTHERS 7. LPA-2115-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus RAM PARKASH AND OTHERS 8. LPA-2116-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus SURINDER SINGH 9. LPA-2133-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus TALWINDER SINGH AND OTHERS 10. LPA-2148-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus JASPAL SINGH AND OTHERS 11. LPA-2149-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus BALVIR SINGH 12. LPA-2150-2024 ……Appellants …..Respondents ……Appellants …..Respondents ……Appellants …..Respondent ……Appellants …..Respondents ……Appellants …..Respondents ……Appellants …..Respondent STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS ……Appellants Versus HIMANSHU 2025.05.26 12:28 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. LPA-2032-2024 (O&M) & other connected matters -3- MAJOR SINGH AND OTHERS 13. LPA-2162-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus MUKHTIAR SINGH AND ANOTHER 14. LPA-2163-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus GURSEWAK SINGH 15. LPA-2441-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus CHHINDA SINGH 16. LPA-2442-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus AVTAR SINGH AND OTHERS 17. LPA-2446-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus TEJA SINGH 18. LPA-2447-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus HIMANSHU 2025.05.26 12:28 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. …..Respondents ……Appellants …..Respondents ……Appellants …..Respondent ……Appellants …..Respondent ……Appellants …..Respondents ……Appellants …..Respondent ……Appellants LPA-2032-2024 (O&M) & other connected matters -4- JAGDISH KUMAR 19. LPA-2448-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus DHIR SINGH AND ANOTHER 20. LPA-2449-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus RATTAN SINGH AND OTHERS 21. LPA-2456-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus KALA SINGH AND OTHERS 22. LPA-2462-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus HARBANS KAUR AND ANOTHER 23. LPA-2465-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus SUKHDEV SINGH AND OTHERS 24. LPA-2474-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus BHAGA HIMANSHU 2025.05.26 12:28 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. …..Respondent ……Appellants …..Respondents ……Appellants …..Respondents ……Appellants …..Respondents ……Appellants …..Respondents ……Appellants …..Respondents ……Appellants …..Respondent LPA-2032-2024 (O&M) & other connected matters -5- 25. LPA-2475-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus CHINDERPAL AND ANOTHER 26. LPA-2480-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus TARLOCHAN SINGH AND OTHERS 27. LPA-2481-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus TARSEM LAL AND OTHERS 28. LPA-2482-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus AMRIK SINGH AND OTHERS 29. LPA-2522-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus DAULAT RAM AND OTHERS 30. LPA-2177-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus SARDARA SINGH AND ANOTHER 31. LPA-2179-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS HIMANSHU 2025.05.26 12:28 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. ……Appellants …..Respondents ……Appellants …..Respondents ……Appellants …..Respondents ……Appellants …..Respondents ……Appellants …..Respondents ……Appellants …..Respondents ……Appellants LPA-2032-2024 (O&M) & other connected matters -6- Versus MALKAN SINGH 32. LPA-2180-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus SATPAL 33. LPA-2184-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus GURDEV SINGH AND OTHERS 34. LPA-2200-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus BALBIR SINGH AND OTHERS 35. LPA-2203-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus MUKHTIAR KHAN AND OTHERS 36. LPA-2204-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus BHAGIRATH AND OTHERS 37. LPA-2205-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS SHER SINGH AND OTHERS Versus HIMANSHU 2025.05.26 12:28 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. …..Respondent ……Appellants …..Respondent ……Appellants …..Respondents ……Appellants …..Respondents ……Appellants …..Respondents ……Appellants …..Respondents ……Appellants …..Respondents LPA-2032-2024 (O&M) & other connected matters -7- 38. LPA-2207-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus HARBANS KAUR 39. LPA-2235-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus AMARJEET SINGH AND ANOTHER 40. LPA-2236-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus OM PARKASH 41. LPA-2237-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus HARI RAM AND OTHERS 42. LPA-2238-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus BHAGIRATH AND OTHERS 43. LPA-2239-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus BALBIR SINGH AND OTHERS 44. LPA-2240-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS HIMANSHU 2025.05.26 12:28 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. ……Appellants …..Respondent ……Appellants …..Respondents ……Appellants …..Respondent ……Appellants …..Respondents ……Appellants …..Respondents ……Appellants …..Respondents LPA-2032-2024 (O&M) & other connected matters -8- Versus HARJEET AND OTHERS 45. LPA-2241-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus KAKA RAM AND OTHERS 46. LPA-2246-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus NAJAR SINGH AND OTHERS 47. LPA-2247-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus GAMDOOR SINGH AND OTHERS 48. LPA-2248-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus BALWINDER RAM AND OTHERS 49. LPA-2274-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus AKHTAR KHAN 50. LPA-2283-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS LACHHMAN SINGH AND OTHERS Versus HIMANSHU 2025.05.26 12:28 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. ……Appellants …..Respondents ……Appellants …..Respondents ……Appellants …..Respondents ……Appellants …..Respondents ……Appellants …..Respondents ……Appellants …..Respondent ……Appellants …..Respondents LPA-2032-2024 (O&M) & other connected matters -9- 51. LPA-2298-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus BUDH RAM AND OTHERS 52. LPA-2299-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus BHAGA AND OTHERS 53. LPA-2301-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus SALIM KUMAR 54. LPA-2316-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus CHARNA AND OTHERS 55. LPA-2317-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus RAVI KUMAR SHARMA 56. LPA-2319-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus MAJOR SINGH AND OTHERS 57. LPA-2336-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS HIMANSHU 2025.05.26 12:28 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. ……Appellants …..Respondents ……Appellants …..Respondents ……Appellants …..Respondent ……Appellants …..Respondents ……Appellants …..Respondent ……Appellants …..Respondents ……Appellants LPA-2032-2024 (O&M) & other connected matters -10- Versus MEJAR SINGH AND OTHERS 58. LPA-2337-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus SOHAN SINGH 59. LPA-2361-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus PRITAM SINGH AND OTHERS 60. LPA-2362-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus BALDEV SINGH AND OTHERS 61. LPA-2363-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus ASHOK KUMAR AND OTHERS 62. LPA-2364-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus VEERA SINGH AND OTHERS 63. LPA-2366-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus KASHMIRI LAL AND ANOTHER HIMANSHU 2025.05.26 12:28 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. …..Respondents ……Appellants …..Respondent ……Appellants …..Respondents ……Appellants …..Respondents ……Appellants …..Respondents ……Appellants …..Respondents ……Appellants …..Respondents LPA-2032-2024 (O&M) & other connected matters -11- 64. LPA-2367-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus RANA SINGH AND OTHERS 65. LPA-2400-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus NIRMAL SINGH AND OTHERS 66. LPA-2401-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus PAWAN AND OTHERS 67. LPA-2402-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus VINOD KUMAR AND ANOTHER 68. LPA-2403-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus ……Appellants …..Respondents ……Appellants …..Respondents ……Appellants …..Respondents ……Appellants …..Respondents ……Appellants JEET SINGH,DIED, LEGAL HEIRS AND ANOTHER 69. LPA-2405-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus RAJ KUMARI AND ANOTHER 70. LPA-2406-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS HIMANSHU 2025.05.26 12:28 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. …..Respondents ……Appellants …..Respondents ……Appellants LPA-2032-2024 (O&M) & other connected matters -12- Versus RAVI KUMAR AND OTHERS 71. LPA-2407-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus JITO AND OTHERS 72. LPA-2408-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus NEETU SINGH AND OTHERS 73. LPA-2409-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus TARSEM LAL AND OTHERS 74. LPA-2411-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus BALWANT SINGH 75. LPA-2592-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus RESHAM SINGH AND OTHERS 76. LPA-2593-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus SHER SINGH AND OTHERS HIMANSHU 2025.05.26 12:28 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. …..Respondents ……Appellants …..Respondents ……Appellants …..Respondents ……Appellants …..Respondents ……Appellants …..Respondent ……Appellants …..Respondents ……Appellants …..Respondents LPA-2032-2024 (O&M) & other connected matters -13- 77. LPA-2594-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus KULWANT SINGH 78. LPA-2595-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus AMAR CHAND AND OTHERS 79. LPA-2598-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus NISHAN SINGH 80. LPA-2600-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus GURPARTAP SINGH 81. LPA-2601-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus TILAK RAJ 82. LPA-2602-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus GURPREET SINGH AND OTHERS 83. LPA-2582-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS HIMANSHU 2025.05.26 12:28 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. ……Appellants …..Respondent ……Appellants …..Respondents ……Appellants …..Respondent ……Appellants …..Respondent ……Appellants …..Respondent ……Appellants …..Respondents LPA-2032-2024 (O&M) & other connected matters -14- Versus GURPARTAP SINGH AND OTHERS 84. LPA-2581-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus KULDEEP SHARMA (died) Legal Heirs & Ors. 85. LPA-2573-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus AMANPREET SINGH AND ANOTHER 86. LPA-2574-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus KARNAIL SINGH 87. LPA-2578-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus SHAM LAL AND OTHERS 88. LPA-2577-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus AMRIK SINGH AND ANOTHER 89. LPA-2555-2024 MUKHTIAR SINGH AND ANOTHER STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus ……Appellants …..Respondents ……Appellants …..Respondents ……Appellants …..Respondents ……Appellants …..Respondent ……Appellants …..Respondents ……Appellants …..Respondents ……Appellants …..Respondents HIMANSHU 2025.05.26 12:28 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. LPA-2032-2024 (O&M) & other connected matters -15- 90. LPA-2560-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus HARBANS LAL AND OTHERS 91. LPA-2561-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus KULDEEP SHARMA 92. LPA-2565-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus MIT SINGH AND OTHERS 93. LPA-2545-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus TARLOK SINGH 94. LPA-2591-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus SARABJEET KAUR AND OTHERS 95. LPA-2604-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus GURMAIL SINGH 96. LPA-2576-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS HIMANSHU 2025.05.26 12:28 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. ……Appellants …..Respondents ……Appellants …..Respondent ……Appellants …..Respondents ……Appellants …..Respondent ……Appellants …..Respondents ……Appellants …..Respondent ……Appellants LPA-2032-2024 (O&M) & other connected matters -16- Versus BALBIR SINGH AND OTHERS 97. LPA-2684-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus BHAJAN LAL 98. LPA-2617-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus SATNAM SINGH AND OTHERS 99. LPA-2628-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus MAHINDER SINGH AND OTHERS 100. LPA-2630-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus AMAR NATH AND OTHERS 101. LPA-2631-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus BALBIR SINGH 102. LPA-2627-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS AVTAR SINGH Versus HIMANSHU 2025.05.26 12:28 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. …..Respondents ……Appellants …..Respondent ……Appellants …..Respondents ……Appellants …..Respondents ……Appellants …..Respondents ……Appellants …..Respondent ……Appellants …..Respondent LPA-2032-2024 (O&M) & other connected matters -17- 103. LPA-2773-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus RAJ KUMAR AND OTHERS 104. LPA-2774-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus ……Appellants …..Respondents ……Appellants SANT RAM THROUGH LEGAL HEIRS AND OTHERS 105. LPA-2775-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus PREM KUMAR AND OTHERS 106. LPA-2776-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus AMRIK SINGH AND OTHERS 107. LPA-2778-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus JOGINDER SINGH (THROUGH LRS) 108. LPA-2780-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus JAGAT RAM AND OTHERS 109. LPA-2750-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS HIMANSHU 2025.05.26 12:28 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. …..Respondents ……Appellants …..Respondents ……Appellants …..Respondents ……Appellants …..Respondent ……Appellants …..Respondents ……Appellants LPA-2032-2024 (O&M) & other connected matters -18- Versus ROOP CHAND 110. LPA-2736-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus SITA RAM AND OTHERS 111. LPA-2737-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus KARTAR SINGH AND OTHERS 112. LPA-2738-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus JOGGA SINGH AND OTHERS 113. LPA-2739-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus GIAN SINGH AND OTHERS 114. LPA-2801-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus PREM CHAND AND OTHERS 115. LPA-2802-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS AMRIK SINGH AND OTHERS Versus HIMANSHU 2025.05.26 12:28 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. …..Respondent ……Appellants …..Respondents ……Appellants …..Respondents ……Appellants …..Respondents ……Appellants …..Respondents ……Appellants …..Respondents ……Appellants …..Respondents LPA-2032-2024 (O&M) & other connected matters -19- 116. LPA-2862-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus BUDH RAM AND OTHERS 117. LPA-2866-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus NISHAN SINGH 118. LPA-2887-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus MALKIAT SINGH AND OTHERS 119. LPA-2947-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus SARABJIT SINGH AND OTHERS 120. LPA-2986-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus BALHARI 121. LPA-3021-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus MALOOK SINGH AND ANOTHER 122. LPA-2948-2024 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS HIMANSHU 2025.05.26 12:28 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. ……Appellants …..Respondents ……Appellants …..Respondent ……Appellants …..Respondents ……Appellants …..Respondents ……Appellants …..Respondent ……Appellants …..Respondents LPA-2032-2024 (O&M) & other connected matters -20- Versus BHAJAN SINGH 123. LPA-86-2025 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus JAGAT RAM AND OTHERS 124. LPA-100-2025 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus JOG RAJ 125. LPA-104-2025 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus RAM PARKASH AND OTHERS 126. LPA-169-2025 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus JASPAL SINGH AND OTHERS 127. LPA-14-2025 THE PUNJAB STATE SPORTS COUNCIL Versus LAL CHAND AND ORS 128. LPA-19-2025 THE PUNJAB STATE SPORTS COUNCIL Versus ……Appellants …..Respondent ……Appellants …..Respondents ……Appellants …..Respondent ……Appellants …..Respondents ……Appellants …..Respondents ……Appellant …..Respondents ……Appellant HIMANSHU 2025.05.26 12:28 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. LPA-2032-2024 (O&M) & other connected matters -21- DHARAM PAL AND OTHERS 129. LPA-34-2025 THE PUNJAB STATE SPORTS COUNCIL Versus SADA SHIV YADAV AND ORS 130. LPA-37-2025 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus KULWANT SINGH SANDHU AND OTHERS 131. LPA-128-2025 THE PUNJAB STATE SPORTS COUNCIL Versus JASWANT SINGH AND OTHERS 132. LPA-556-2025 THE PUNJAB STATE SPORTS COUNCIL Versus JASWANT SINGH AND OTHERS 133. LPA-301-2025 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus MOHINDER SINGH AND OTHERS 134. LPA-337-2025 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Versus BACHAN AND OTHERS …..Respondents ……Appellant …..Respondents ……Appellants …..Respondents ……Appellant …..Respondents ……Appellant …..Respondents ……Appellants …..Respondents ……Appellants …..Respondents HIMANSHU 2025.05.26 12:28 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. LPA-2032-2024 (O&M) & other connected matters -22- 135. LPA-492-2025 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS PREM CHAND AND OTHERS Versus 136. LPA-55-2025 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS VINOD KUMAR AND OTHERS Versus ……Appellants …..Respondents ……Appellants …..Respondents
Legal Reasoning
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK JAIN Present:- Mr. Shekhar Verma, Addl. A.G., Punjab, (Through V.C.) and Mr. Kuljit Singh, Addl. A.G., Punjab, for the appellant(s). Mr. Manu Loona, Advocate for the appellants (in LPA Nos.14, 19, 34 128 & 556 of 2025). Mr. Pawan Kumar Mutneja, Senior Advocate, with Mr. V.S. Mahal, Advocate; Ms. Suverna Mutneja, Advocate and Mr. Vishesh Bhatia, Advocate for respondent(s) (in LPA-2032, 2408, 2449, 2336, 2150, 2628, 2239, 2986, 2593, 2364, 2298, 2480, 2248, 2088 of 2024). Mr. Baldev Singh Sodhi, Advocate for the respondent(s) (in LPA-2401, 2780, 2363, 2409, 2032 of 2024 and LPA 86 & 337 of 2025). Mr. Sandeep Siwatch, Advocate for the respondent(s) (in LPA-2577-2024). Mr. Harbans Lal Sharma, Advocate and Mr. Vishal Sharma, Advocate for the respondent(s) (in LPA-2073-2024). Mr. Dhiraj Chawla, Advocate for the respondent(s)(in LPA 37 & 128 of 2023). Mr. Vicky Arora, Advocate for Ms. Alisha Arora, Advocate for the respondent(s) (in LPA-2274 of 2024). HIMANSHU 2025.05.26 12:28 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. LPA-2032-2024 (O&M) & other connected matters -23- Ms. Anju Arora, Advocate for Ms. Alisha Arora, Advocate for the respondent(s) (in LPA-2801-2024 & 301-2025). Mr. Arjun Sawhni, Advocate for Mr. Manu K. Bhandari, Advocate for appellant(s) (in LPA-2555-2024) and for respondent (s) (in LPA-14, 19 & 34 of 2025). Mr. Ashu Rana, Advocate for respondent(s) (in LPA-2179-2024). SUDHIR SINGH, J. For the reasons given in the applications, the delay in re- filing and filing of all the appeals, is condoned, subject to all just exceptions. 2. This order shall dispose of the above noted batch of 136 intra Court appeals arising out of a common order dated 26.02.2024,
Decision
whereby the writ petitions filed by the respondents (writ petitioners) were disposed of with the following directions:- i) This Court in the normal course cannot ask State to create or sanction posts. ii) The petitioners who had completed service of 10 years by the end of December’ 2006, either at present are in service or have already retired, are entitled to regular post and they cannot be denied regularization on the ground of lack of sanctioned post or minimum education qualification. To avoid burden on State exchequer, it is clarified that from the deemed date of their regularization, they shall be entitled to minimum of pay HIMANSHU 2025.05.26 12:28 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. LPA-2032-2024 (O&M) & other connected matters -24- scale plus dearness allowance and grade pay till the date of this order and thereafter regular pay scale. iii) The petitioners who are still in service but did not complete service of 10 years by the end of December’ 2006 would form part of dying cadre created by 2023 Policy. The State, in view of long service of these employees, would not insist for minimum qualification. They from the date of completing service of 10 years would be entitled to minimum of pay scale plus dearness allowance plus grade pay till the date they are regularized in terms of 2023 Policy. iv) The petitioners who did not complete service of 10 years by the end of December’ 2006 and during the pendency of present litigation have superannuated or passed away would be entitled to minimum of pay scale plus dearness allowance and grade pay from the date of completing service of 10 years till the date of their retirement or death. v) The petitioners who have already been regularized by 31.12.2016 shall not be entitled to any additional financial benefit HIMANSHU 2025.05.26 12:28 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. LPA-2032-2024 (O&M) & other connected matters -25- because they are already getting higher amount of salary for last couple of years. vi) The respondent-State shall not be liable to pay interest on arrears arising on account of re-fixation of pay. 3. The aforesaid order was passed by noticing the facts in CWP-19238-2013. As LPA-2032-2024 arises out of the aforesaid CWP, the facts are taken from the said appeal. 4. The respondents (writ petitioners) filed the aforesaid writ petitions before the learned Single Judge seeking a writ in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondents to regularize their services pursuant to the policy dated 18.03.2011. It was the case of the respondents (writ petitioners) that they had completed service of 17- 18 years on the date of filing of the writ petition and from time to time they had been transferred from one project to the other. It was further claimed by them that they were being paid wages at the rates fixed by the Deputy Commissioner. 5. The learned Single Judge, after taking into consideration various judgments of the Hon’ble Apex Court and the rival contentions of the parties, has disposed of the bunch of writ petitions, as noticed above. 6. It may be noticed that when the appeal came up for hearing on 12.11.2024, the learned State counsel had made a statement that case of each of the employee was being assessed individually and the matter had been placed before the Hon’ble Chief HIMANSHU 2025.05.26 12:28 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. LPA-2032-2024 (O&M) & other connected matters -26- Minister of the State for final decision. The order dated 12.11.2024 passed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court reads as under:- “Learned counsel for appellant-State submits that as of now recommendation has been made for regularization of services of 75 respondents/writ petitioners and in so far as 506 persons are concerned, they are being considered to be adjusted under the Policy for Welfare of Adhoc, Contractual, Daily Wages, Work Charged and Temporary Employees, 2023. Claims of other writ petitioners in all writ petitions decided by a single judgment dated 26.02.2024 are being individually assessed. There are admittedly number of petitioners in most of the writ petitions. When asked as to whether the State still wishes to pursue the appeal, it is submitted that complete picture would be clear after the entire exercise has been undertaken. Learned counsel for appellants thus prays for an adjournment. At the same time it is submitted that as contempt petitions have been filed by some of writ petitioners, therefore said proceedings may be kept in abeyance for a period of four weeks. It is brought to our notice that Mr. Ajoy Sharma, IAS, Secretary Department of Forest and Wildlife Preservation, Punjab, had appeared before HIMANSHU 2025.05.26 12:28 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. LPA-2032-2024 (O&M) & other connected matters -27- learned Contempt Court on 18.10.2024 and stated that in terms of order dated 26.02.2024 process with regard to regularization of service of petitioners is in progress and that needful shall be done within a period of four months from that date. Learned counsel for the State submits that this process is likely to take another four weeks. Matter has been placed before the Hon’ble Chief Minister of the State and final decision is likely to be taken. Keeping in view the above, these appeals are adjourned for 20.01.2025. It is open to the appellant-State to bring all these facts before learned Contempt Court on the date fixed. 7. Subsequently, when the matter was taken up on 18.03.2025, while noticing the contentions of the learned counsel for the appellants, the following order was passed. “ Learned counsel for appellant-State informs that matter has still not been placed before the Cabinet due to certain objections raised by Department of Personnel. Learned counsel for State further submits that about four weeks are required to complete the entire process including decision to be taken by the Cabinet. Let a specific affidavit in regard to the time line be filed by the Chief Secretary, Punjab, within next two weeks. HIMANSHU 2025.05.26 12:28 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. LPA-2032-2024 (O&M) & other connected matters -28- At request, adjourned to 05.05.2025. Decision taken by Cabinet be placed on record on or before the next date of hearing. No further adjournment shall be afforded. Keeping in view the above, learned Contempt Court is requested to adjourn the matter(s) as may be listed before it, beyond the date fixed in these appeals subject to filing of necessary affidavit by the Chief Secretary, Punjab in the present matter. Photocopy of this order be placed on the files of above mentioned connected cases. 8. In compliance with the said order dated 05.05.2025, a short reply by way of affidavit of under Secretary, Department of Forest and Wildlife Preservation, Punjab was filed. The relevant part of the said affidavit reads as under:- “ 4. That in order to expedite the implementation of the directions given by this Hon’ble Court, after collating the records and necessary information, on 11.04.2025, a meeting under the chairmanship of Chief Secretary Punjab was held, wherein, following decision were taken:- i) The Personnel Department, Government of Punjab was directed to take immediate action with regard to regularization of 72 daily wage HIMANSHU 2025.05.26 12:28 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. LPA-2032-2024 (O&M) & other connected matters -29- workers covered under the 18.03.2011 policy. In terms of this decision 24 petitioners in the present bunch of cases would be the beneficiaries. ii) With regard to granting security of tenure to 506 daily wage workers in terms of policy instructions of 2023, the Personnel Department, Government of Punjab was directed to immediately put up the file for orders. In terms of this decision, 101 petitioners in the present bunch of cases would be the beneficiaries. iii) With regard to the relaxation in educational qualification and age limit in the policy dated 16.05.2023 to ensure security of tenure to 378 petitioners who did not fulfil the age limit and educational qualification of the policy dated 16.05.2023. It was directed the case be put up before the council of Ministers for taking decision. A copy of the minutes of meeting dated 11.04.2025 is annexed herewith as Annexure A-2. HIMANSHU 2025.05.26 12:28 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. LPA-2032-2024 (O&M) & other connected matters -30- 5. That insofar as decision taken in the meeting dated 11.04.2025 on the issues no. 4 (i) and 4 (ii) is concerned, it is the Hon’ble Chief Minister of Punjab, who has to grant the final approval. The file with complete data/information has been forwarded to his office. 6. That further, insofar as the issue in terms of paragraph 4 (iii) herein above is concerned, the necessary decision has to be taken by the Cabinet/Council of Ministers. In this regard, the necessary Memorandum was prepared. The complete file with data/information has been forwarded to the office of Hon’ble Chief Minister, who is the competent authority to convene the meeting of the Cabinet/Counsel of Ministers. 9. Today, when the matter was taken up for hearing, learned counsel for the appellants has reiterated the stand taken in the aforesaid affidavit stating that the matter is pending approval before the Authorities as indicated in Paras 5 and 6 above. 10. Be that as it may, the fact remains that the writ petitions were filed in the years 2003-2013. The length of service of the respondents (writ petitioners) as indicated in the writ petitions, has not been disputed by the appellants-State. HIMANSHU 2025.05.26 12:28 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. LPA-2032-2024 (O&M) & other connected matters -31- 11. We may also notice that sufficient opportunity has already been granted to the appellant-authorities to consider the matter and take appropriate action/decision pursuant to the judgment delivered by the learned Single Judge. However, as noticed above, it is still not forthcoming as to why the authorities are delaying the matter. It is with this background that we have taken up the matters for final disposal. 12. Learned counsel appearing for the appellants has argued that while passing the impugned judgment, the learned Single Judge has lost sight of the settled judicial pronouncements that no person can be regularized in the absence of any sanctioned post. It is further argued that in the Constitution Bench Judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Secretary, State of Karnataka & Ors. vs. Uma Devi & Ors. (2006) 4 SCC 1, it has been held that only those employees, who were appointed against sanctioned posts, having minimum educational qualification, could be considered for regularization. It is further argued that the respondents (writ petitioners) knew it very well at the time of their appointment that they were not appointed against the sanctioned posts and, thus, they have no vested right for regularization. It is yet further argued that the respondents (writ petitioners) are working on daily wages and no policy has been framed by the Government/State as regards the regularization of the services of such daily wagers. Learned counsel for the appellants contends that the concept of equal pay-equal work cannot be made applicable to the respondents (writ petitioners) as they were not working against the sanctioned posts. While assailing the HIMANSHU 2025.05.26 12:28 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. LPA-2032-2024 (O&M) & other connected matters -32- judgment of the learned Single Judge, it is further argued that once the respondents (writ petitioners) were not having the requisite qualification for being considered for regularization under the policy, the directions contained in Para 47 of the judgment of the learned Single Judge are not sustainable. It is lastly argued that by issuing the mandate, the learned Single Judge has directed the appellants-State to create the posts and regularize the respondents (writ petitioners), which is not sustainable in the eyes of law. Accordingly, a prayer has been made for setting aside the impugned judgment passed by the learned Single Judge. 13. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the respondents (writ petitioners), while defending the judgment passed by the learned Single Judge have vehemently contended that having worked for more than 30 years, the respondents (writ petitioners) cannot be denied the benefit of regularization merely on the basis of the fact that they have been/are working on daily wages. It is further argued that the stand of the appellants that the respondents (writ petitioners) were not appointed against the sanctioned posts is not tenable as it is settled principle of law that once an employee has been appointed to discharge the duties and he continuous working as such for years together, he is entitled to regularization of his services in terms of various judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court and particularly the one in Uma Devi’s case (supra). 14. It is further argued by the learned counsel for the respondents (writ petitioners) that the stand of the appellants as regards the matter being under active consideration of the authorities HIMANSHU 2025.05.26 12:28 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. LPA-2032-2024 (O&M) & other connected matters -33- is nothing, but a tactic to delay and defeat the legal rights of the respondents (writ petitioners). Accordingly, a prayer has been made for dismissal of the appeals filed by the appellants-State. 15. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have also gone through the paper book, including the impugned judgment. 16. In our opinion, the question that arises for consideration by this Court is whether the learned Single Judge is justified in issuing the directions contained in Para No.47 of the impugned judgment as regards the regularization of the respondents (writ petitioners) and their entitlement to the minimum of pay scale, plus dearness allowance and the grade pay. 17. The learned Single Judge, after noticing various judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court including the Uma Devi’s Case (supra) framed the following four questions for consideration:- i) Whether this Court can direct the respondents to create/sanction the posts? ii) Whether the petitioners are entitled to be regularized/absorbed? iii) Whether the petitioners are entitled to minimum of pay scale including dearness allowance and grade pay? iv) What relief can be granted to those who after having rendered service of more than 30 years, during the pendency of their petitions have superannuated or passed away?” HIMANSHU 2025.05.26 12:28 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. LPA-2032-2024 (O&M) & other connected matters -34- 18. Under question No.1, it has been observed by the learned Single Judge that the appellants-State had started making appointments on contract/ad-hoc/temporary/part time basis in every Departments and many teachers appointed on contract basis were getting miniscule in comparison to the regularly appointed peons. It was further observed that the Hon’ble Apex Court in case of exigencies had permitted appointment on contract basis, but not as a routine practice. It was further observed that most of the respondents (writ petitioners) were appointed much prior to the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Uma Devi’s case (supra) and the regularization policy of the State issued in 2001 became inconsequential post the said judgment. Thus, the State was duty bound to consider all the employees, who had completed 10 years of service without intervention by the end of 2006. Accordingly, it was held that in the normal course, the Court cannot direct the State to create or sanction the post. 19. Under question No.2, while elaborately discussing a plethora of judgments of the Hon’ble Apex Court, it was held that once the employees had worked for a long period, it would be unjustified to deny them benefit of regularization on the ground of not possessing minimum qualification. 20. As regards question No.3, the respondents (writ petitioners) were held entitled to the minimum pay scale plus dearness allowance and grade pay provided they had completed 10 years of service. HIMANSHU 2025.05.26 12:28 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. LPA-2032-2024 (O&M) & other connected matters -35- 21. As regards question No.4 it was held that the respondents (writ petitioners) who had superannuated or passed away after completing 20 years of service were entitled to the benefit of minimum pay scale dearness allowance and grade pay for the period beyond service of 10 years and the respondents (writ petitioners) who had completed 10 years of service by 31.12.2006, but the records had either been destroyed or lost by the appellants-State, it was held that if such respondents (writ petitioners) were having documentary evidence in respect of completion of 10 years of service by them, they would be at liberty to submit available evidence to the appellants, who while deciding the question of 10 years of service shall consider it. 22. After carefully and minutely going through the judgment passed by the learned Single Judge, we are of the considered opinion that the directions given by the learned Single Judge are perfectly justified for the following reasons:- (1) Once the appellants have not disputed the length of service of the respondents (writ petitioners), they cannot deny their legal right for being considered or entitled to regularization merely on the ground that they have been working as such on daily wages. Grant of any indulgence on such count would amount to allowing the appellants to take benefit of their dominion. (2) Even if the respondents (writ petitioners) had worked/have been working on daily wages, the HIMANSHU 2025.05.26 12:28 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. LPA-2032-2024 (O&M) & other connected matters -36- fact remains that they had rendered their services for the cause of the appellants and gave/ have given their prime years in discharge of such duties. Obviously they continued working as such, because the duties/works assigned to them were the requirements of the appellants. The appellants cannot be allowed to play according to their convenience. On the one hand, they have availed the services of the respondents (writ petitioners) and on the other, they are denying them the benefit of regularization, merely on the ground that the respondents (writ petitioners) were working as daily wages. (3) The plea of the appellants that the respondents (writ petitioners) were appointed as daily wages, is not tenable for the reason that daily wagers are only employed as a stop gap arrangements for a limited period but in the instant case, the employees have either worked or been working for more than three decades and therefore, they cannot be termed to be daily wagers. (4) It is not the case of the appellants that they have not considered the cases of the other similarly situated employees under different HIMANSHU 2025.05.26 12:28 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. LPA-2032-2024 (O&M) & other connected matters -37- policies from time to time. That being the position, the appellants cannot be heard saying that the respondents (writ petitioners) cannot be considered for regularization or they are not entitled to such benefit for want of sanctioned posts. (5) It is settled in service jurisprudence that once an employee has worked for a considerable long period, his case is to be considered for regularization by the State by framing appropriate policy in terms of the Constitution Bench judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Uma Devi’s case (supra). The only caveat which bars such regularization is that the appointment to such posts must not be a back door entry and rather, the same should be after following the due procedure of law as provided under Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. (6) The deliberations on the part of the appellant- State as regards the consideration of the cases of the respondents (writ petitioners) on individual basis is an exercise within their domain in order to comply with the judgment passed by the learned Single Judge, but as HIMANSHU 2025.05.26 12:28 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. LPA-2032-2024 (O&M) & other connected matters -38- noticed above, the present batch of appeals cannot be kept pending for an indefinite period. (7) We may also deal with the argument raised by the learned counsel for the appellants that the directions given by the learned Single Judge in Para No.47 amount to creation of the posts. Suffice to say that before coming to the conclusion as indicated in Para No.47 of the judgment of the learned Single Judge, an extensive discussion and issue wise findings have been recorded by the learned Single Judge and, thus, it has been held that though the Court cannot ask the State to create or sanction post(s), yet the respondents (writ petitioners) cannot be denied the benefit of regularization on the ground of lack of sanctioned post(s) or minimum educational qualification. It may further be observed that an employee, who has rendered more than 30 years service under the State, cannot be denied benefit of regularization on the ground of lack of requisite/minimum qualification. No doubt the parameter of requisite educational qualification is one of the conditions of the appointment to a particular post, but when an employee appointed against such posts has been working HIMANSHU 2025.05.26 12:28 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. LPA-2032-2024 (O&M) & other connected matters -39- for more than three decades, denying him the benefit of regularization on the ground of not possessing minimum educational qualification would be totally iniquitous. 23. In view of the above, while answering the question framed above, it is held that the impugned judgment passed by the learned Single Judge does not suffer from any patent illegality or perversity. Consequently, the present batch of the appeals is hereby dismissed. No other point has been urged. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed 24. 25. of. [ SUDHIR SINGH ] JUDGE [ ALOK JAIN ] JUDGE 16.05.2025 himanshu Whether speaking/reasoned Whether reportable Yes/No Yes/No HIMANSHU 2025.05.26 12:28 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.