AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
HARPREET SINGH BRAR J. (Oral)
Prayer in this writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus, directing the respondents to implement the Old Pension Scheme on the petitioners, who were recruited prior to 01.01.2006 and the petitioners be granted all the consequential benefits.
Learned counsel for the petitioners, inter alia, contends that the petitioners were recruited during the years 2003-2004 pursuant to their selection on the recommendations of the Haryana Public Service Commission (HPSC)/Haryana Staff Selection Commission (HSSC). The details of the petitioners, along with their respective designations and dates of regular appointment/joining, are as under:
| Name | Designation | Date of regular appointment/ Joining |
|---|---|---|
| Devender Kumar (Petitioner No. 1) | Assistant | 7.1.2004 |
| Sunil Kumar (Petitioner No.2) | Assistant | 9.1.2004 |
| Surender Kumar (Petitioner No.3) | Assistant | 9.1.2004 |
| Tara Chand (Petitioner No.4) | Assistant | 14.9.2004 |
| Sushil Kumar (Petitioner No.5) | Dy. Supdt. | 9.1.2004 |
| Navdeep Kumar (Petitioner No.6) | Asstt. Professor | 14.8.2003 |
| Rajni Kamboj (Petitioner No.7) | Asstt. Professor | 6.8.2003 |
| Meena Kumar (Petitioner No.8) | Asstt. Professor | 5.2.2004 |
| Sanjay Charaya (Petitioner No.9) | Asstt. Professor | 13.8.2003 |
| Pawan Kumar (Petitioner No.10) | Asstt. Professor | 22.9.2003 |
| Wazir Singh (Petitioner No.11) | Asstt. Professor | 8.8.2003 |
| Jaibir Singh (Petitioner No.12) | Workshop Instructor | 13.9.2004 |
| Devinder Pal (Petitioner No.13) | Workshop Instructor | 16.9.2004 |
| Parvinder (Petitioner No.14) | Workshop Instructor | 14.9.2004 |
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that all the petitioners were appointed during the period from 07.01.2004 to 14.09.2004, i.e. prior to the introduction of the New Pension Scheme, which was implemented with effect from 01.01.2006. He further refers to letter dated 22.09.2014 (Annexure P-3), whereby the Principal of the College requested the Director General, Technical Education, Haryana, to extend the benefit of the Old Pension Scheme to the petitioners. He further submits that the petitioners submitted a representation dated 05.07.2018 (Annexure P-5) seeking extension of the benefit of the Old Pension Scheme. Learned counsel for the petitioners further contends that the case of the petitioners is squarely covered by the judgment rendered by this Court in CWP-20263-2024, titled as Om Prakash vs. State of Haryana and others, decided on 09.07.2026.
Learned counsel for the petitioners, at this stage, submits that he would be satisfied if the representation (Annexure P-5) of the petitioners is decided by respondent No.2/competent authority by passing a speaking order in a time bound manner.
Learned State counsel, appearing on advance notice, submits that he has no objection, in case a direction is issued to respondent No.2/competent authority for time-bound consideration and decision of the representation (Annexure P-5) of the petitioners by passing a speaking order.
Therefore, in view of the limited prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioners, the respondent No.2/competent authority is directed to consider the representation (Annexure P-5) of the petitioners and pass a speaking order in the light of the judgment passed by this Court in Om Prakash’s case (supra), after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners, 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.2/competent authority.
Disposed of, accordingly.