` 208 (2 case) IIN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGGARH LPA-11145-2026 (O&M) Date off Decision: 29.05.2026 Karamjit Singgh and others …Appellants Vs. State of Haryaana and others …Respondents CWP-99065-2026 (O&M) Date off Decision: 29.05.2026 Vijender Singgh and others …Petitioners Vs. State of Haryaana and others …Respondents CORAM: HHON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHHWANI KUMAR MISHRA HHON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ROHHIT KAPOOR Present: MMr. Ankur Mittal, Sr. Advocate wwith MMs. Kushaldeep Kaur, Advocate , MMr. Sakal Sikri, Advocate and MMr. Siddhanth Arora, Advocate ffor the appellants/petitioners. MMs. Tanushree Gupta, Addl. AG , Haryana. MMr. Rahil Mahajan, Advocate forr the applicants. *** ASHWANI KKUMAR MISHRA, J. (Oral) 1. TThe appellants/petitioners are hoolding charge of higher post unnder ‘Current Dutty Charge’. They are aggrieveed by the online Transfer Pollicy, wherein the pposts occupied by them are beingg treated as vacant and are soughht to be filled as peer Transfer Policy. RAJESH KUMAR 2026.05.30 12:51 I attest the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. LPA-1145-2026 (O&M) [2] 2. The Online Transfer Policy was otherwise challenged in Writ Petition No.7092-2026, on various grounds. On 21.05.2026, the aforesaid writ petition was disposed of in the light of statement made by the learned Advocate General, Haryana that the State would formulate an appropriate Transfer Policy on rational consideration, afresh.

3. Once that be the position, we are of the view that the present appeal/writ petition can also be disposed of with the observation that while formulating the Transfer Policy, afresh, the concerns raised by the persons such as the present appellants/petitioners, who are holding the posts under ‘Current Duty Charge', would also be taken note of. Such consideration by the State shall not be hindered by any observations made by the learned Single Judge in the impugned judgment. 4. The appeal/writ petition are accordingly disposed of. 5. All pending misc. application(s), if any, also stands disposed of. (ASHWANI KUMAR MISHRA) JUDGE (ROHIT KAPOOR) 29.05.2026 JUDGE rajesh 1. Whether speaking/reasoned? : Yes/No 2. Whether reportable? : Yes/No RAJESH KUMAR 2026.05.30 12:51 I attest the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.

` 208 (2 case) IIN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGGARH LPA-11145-2026 (O&M) Date off Decision: 29.05.2026 Karamjit Singgh and others …Appellants Vs. State of Haryaana and others …Respondents CWP-99065-2026 (O&M) Date off Decision: 29.05.2026 Vijender Singgh and others …Petitioners Vs. State of Haryaana and others …Respondents CORAM: HHON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHHWANI KUMAR MISHRA HHON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ROHHIT KAPOOR Present: MMr. Ankur Mittal, Sr. Advocate wwith MMs. Kushaldeep Kaur, Advocate , MMr. Sakal Sikri, Advocate and MMr. Siddhanth Arora, Advocate ffor the appellants/petitioners. MMs. Tanushree Gupta, Addl. AG , Haryana. MMr. Rahil Mahajan, Advocate forr the applicants. *** ASHWANI KKUMAR MISHRA, J. (Oral) 1. TThe appellants/petitioners are hoolding charge of higher post unnder ‘Current Dutty Charge’. They are aggrieveed by the online Transfer Pollicy, wherein the pposts occupied by them are beingg treated as vacant and are soughht to be filled as peer Transfer Policy. RAJESH KUMAR 2026.05.30 12:51 I attest the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. LPA-1145-2026 (O&M) [2] 2. The Online Transfer Policy was otherwise challenged in Writ Petition No.7092-2026, on various grounds. On 21.05.2026, the aforesaid writ petition was disposed of in the light of statement made by the learned Advocate General, Haryana that the State would formulate an appropriate Transfer Policy on rational consideration, afresh.

3. Once that be the position, we are of the view that the present appeal/writ petition can also be disposed of with the observation that while formulating the Transfer Policy, afresh, the concerns raised by the persons such as the present appellants/petitioners, who are holding the posts under ‘Current Duty Charge', would also be taken note of. Such consideration by the State shall not be hindered by any observations made by the learned Single Judge in the impugned judgment. 4. The appeal/writ petition are accordingly disposed of. 5. All pending misc. application(s), if any, also stands disposed of. (ASHWANI KUMAR MISHRA) JUDGE (ROHIT KAPOOR) 29.05.2026 JUDGE rajesh 1. Whether speaking/reasoned? : Yes/No 2. Whether reportable? : Yes/No RAJESH KUMAR 2026.05.30 12:51 I attest the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.