Kulwant Singh & Ors. vs PEPSU Road Transport Corporation Limited & Anr.

NAMIT KUMAR, J. (ORAL)

The present petition has been filed by the petitioners under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of mandamus, directing the respondents to regularize the services of the petitioners, who are satisfactorily serving the respondent-Corporation as drivers and conductors for the last around 23 years, in view of the policy dated 18.03.2011 (Annexure P-1) and the judgment dated 03.09.2025 (Annexure P-3), rendered by this Court in CWP No. 12211 of 2021 titled as "Hans Raj and others. v. PEPSU Road Transport Corporation and another" as also the availability of regular sanctioned posts; for issuance of directions to the respondents to grant all consequential benefits i.e. regular pay scale along with payment of arrears of pay and allowances, due increments, consideration of relative seniority and resultant promotion thereof, to the petitioners from the date of their regularization and for issuance of directions to the respondents to grant equal pay scale along with other benefits to the petitioners, till they are regularized, as are being given from time to time to similar employees who are working against regular posts in view of the observation made by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in State of Punjab v. Jagjit Singh, (2017) 1 SCC 148. Further prayer has been made for restraining the respondents from terminating the services or taking any kind of arbitrary action against the petitioners during the pendency of the petition.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners are working as drivers and conductors with the respondents-Corporation since the dates mentioned as under: -

However, their services have not been regularised. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the case of the petitioners is squarely covered by the judgment of this Court in Hans Raj’s case (supra). She further submits that for redressal of their grievances, the petitioners have also served legal notice dated 09.06.2026 (Annexure P-2) to the respondents which is still pending consideration. She further submits that at this stage, the petitioners would be satisfied, if appropriate directions are issued to the respondents to consider and decide the said legal notice, by passing a speaking order, in a time bound manner.

Notice of motion.

Mr. A.K. Ranolia, Advocate, who appears on behalf of Mr. Anupam Singla, Advocate, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents. He has no objection to the innocuous prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioners.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record of the case.

Without going into the merits of the case at this stage, the present petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No.1 to consider and decide legal notice dated 09.06.2026 (Annexure P-2), submitted by the petitioners expeditiously, by passing a speaking order after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners, preferably within a period of 04 months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. Further, the decision taken thereon shall be conveyed to the petitioners.