117 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-28120-2026 Date of decision: 02.09.2026 Meenakshi and others ....Petitioners Versus State of Haryana and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARPREET SINGH BRAR Present: Mr. Dalbir Singh, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Rahul Dev Singh, Addl.A.G., Haryana. HARPREET SINGH BRAR, J. (ORAL) 1. The present civil writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to appoint the petitioners on regular basis on the posts of PGTs in their concerned subjects qua petitioners No.1 & 2 and on the posts of TGTs qua petitioners No.3 to 5 and as PRT qua petitioners No.6 to 8. Further, to prepare the seniority of the petitioners after appointing them on regular basis and to release all other consequential service benefits of seniority and other financial benefits as per law applicable regarding the difference of their salary from the dates their regularization along with interest.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners inter alia contends that the petitioners were appointed through open advertisement and a transparent selection process against sanctioned posts in a fully Government-funded Model School from the year 2011 onwards. The Governing Body, from time to time, decided that contractual employees would be regularized upon completion of two years of satisfactory service as discernible from Annexure P-11. NEHA 2026.09.02 17:29 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh CWP-28120-2026 -2- Subsequently, a decision was taken that employees completing three years of service would be regularized. Thereafter, the Governing Body decided to adopt the Aarohi School Bye-laws which provided for regular appointment upon completion of five years of satisfactory contractual service (Annexure P-22). The Government, thereafter, called for cases for regularization of eligible contractual employees as discernible from Annexures P-31, P-32 and P-38. It is submitted that the petitioners are eligible for regularization under the regularization policies of the State Government dated 16.06.2014 and 18.06.2014, which have been upheld by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No.1996 of 2024 titled as Madan Singh and others Vs. State of Haryana and others decided on 16.04.2026 (Annexure P-44).

2.1. Similarly situated employees of the same school approached this Court in CWP No.31167 of 2024 titled as Sunil Kumar and others Vs. State of Haryana and others, decided on 14.11.2025 (Annexure P-39), wherein, directions were issued for their regular appointment from the date on which they completed five years of satisfactory contractual service. The LPA No.252 of 2026 preferred by the State as well as the review application were dismissed as discernible from Annexures P-40 and P-41, respectively. The Government of Haryana has also issued implementation instructions dated 11.08.2026 (Annexure P-45) in respect of the aforesaid policy pursuant to the judgments. 2.2. Learned counsel for the petitioners has limited his prayer to the extent that the present petition be treated as a comprehensive representation and the same be decided in a time bound manner by passing a speaking order after affording the petitioners an opportunity of being heard. NEHA 2026.09.02 17:29 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh CWP-28120-2026 -3- 3. Notice of motion. 4. Mr. Rahul Dev Singh, Addl.A.G., Haryana puts in appearance and accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State and submits that the grievance raised by the petitioners in the present writ petition would be considered by passing a speaking order in accordance with the law by respondent No.5, who is also the Director General of Secondary Education.

5. Therefore, in view of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties, the present writ petition is disposed of. Respondent No.5/competent authority is directed to treat this writ petition as a comprehensive representation, consider the claim of the petitioners and pass a speaking order after affording them an opportunity to be heard, within a period of 03 months from the date of receiving a certified copy of this order. Further, the decision taken thereof shall be conveyed to the petitioners. Needless to say, if the petitioners are found entitled to the relief sought, the same shall be granted forthwith by respondent No.5/competent authority. (HARPREET SINGH BRAR) JUDGE 02.09.2026 Neha Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No NEHA 2026.09.02 17:29 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh

117 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-28120-2026 Date of decision: 02.09.2026 Meenakshi and others ....Petitioners Versus State of Haryana and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARPREET SINGH BRAR Present: Mr. Dalbir Singh, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Rahul Dev Singh, Addl.A.G., Haryana. HARPREET SINGH BRAR, J. (ORAL) 1. The present civil writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to appoint the petitioners on regular basis on the posts of PGTs in their concerned subjects qua petitioners No.1 & 2 and on the posts of TGTs qua petitioners No.3 to 5 and as PRT qua petitioners No.6 to 8. Further, to prepare the seniority of the petitioners after appointing them on regular basis and to release all other consequential service benefits of seniority and other financial benefits as per law applicable regarding the difference of their salary from the dates their regularization along with interest.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners inter alia contends that the petitioners were appointed through open advertisement and a transparent selection process against sanctioned posts in a fully Government-funded Model School from the year 2011 onwards. The Governing Body, from time to time, decided that contractual employees would be regularized upon completion of two years of satisfactory service as discernible from Annexure P-11. NEHA 2026.09.02 17:29 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh CWP-28120-2026 -2- Subsequently, a decision was taken that employees completing three years of service would be regularized. Thereafter, the Governing Body decided to adopt the Aarohi School Bye-laws which provided for regular appointment upon completion of five years of satisfactory contractual service (Annexure P-22). The Government, thereafter, called for cases for regularization of eligible contractual employees as discernible from Annexures P-31, P-32 and P-38. It is submitted that the petitioners are eligible for regularization under the regularization policies of the State Government dated 16.06.2014 and 18.06.2014, which have been upheld by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No.1996 of 2024 titled as Madan Singh and others Vs. State of Haryana and others decided on 16.04.2026 (Annexure P-44).

2.1. Similarly situated employees of the same school approached this Court in CWP No.31167 of 2024 titled as Sunil Kumar and others Vs. State of Haryana and others, decided on 14.11.2025 (Annexure P-39), wherein, directions were issued for their regular appointment from the date on which they completed five years of satisfactory contractual service. The LPA No.252 of 2026 preferred by the State as well as the review application were dismissed as discernible from Annexures P-40 and P-41, respectively. The Government of Haryana has also issued implementation instructions dated 11.08.2026 (Annexure P-45) in respect of the aforesaid policy pursuant to the judgments. 2.2. Learned counsel for the petitioners has limited his prayer to the extent that the present petition be treated as a comprehensive representation and the same be decided in a time bound manner by passing a speaking order after affording the petitioners an opportunity of being heard. NEHA 2026.09.02 17:29 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh CWP-28120-2026 -3- 3. Notice of motion. 4. Mr. Rahul Dev Singh, Addl.A.G., Haryana puts in appearance and accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State and submits that the grievance raised by the petitioners in the present writ petition would be considered by passing a speaking order in accordance with the law by respondent No.5, who is also the Director General of Secondary Education.

5. Therefore, in view of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties, the present writ petition is disposed of. Respondent No.5/competent authority is directed to treat this writ petition as a comprehensive representation, consider the claim of the petitioners and pass a speaking order after affording them an opportunity to be heard, within a period of 03 months from the date of receiving a certified copy of this order. Further, the decision taken thereof shall be conveyed to the petitioners. Needless to say, if the petitioners are found entitled to the relief sought, the same shall be granted forthwith by respondent No.5/competent authority. (HARPREET SINGH BRAR) JUDGE 02.09.2026 Neha Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No NEHA 2026.09.02 17:29 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh