AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
NIDHI GUPTA, J. (ORAL)
Present writ petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioners for issuance of a writ in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondents to regularize the services of the petitioners who are Group C employees, employed through HARTRON with Haryana Government on the post of Data Entry Operator in the light of continuous/continued service of 10 years and in the light of judgment dated 20.12.2024 of the Hon’ble Apex Court in Jaggo vs. Union of India and others, 2024 SCC online SC 3826 and of this Court in CWP-31304-2025 titled as Joginder vs. State of Haryana and another, decided on 31.12.2025 along with all consequential benefits.
It is, inter alia, submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that both the petitioners have joined the respondent-Department on 01.09.2016 as Data Entry Operators on daily wages through HARTRON. Since, the date of their initial appointment(s), the petitioners are working regularly without any break and to the satisfaction of respondent-Department. As such, the petitioners have rendered more than 10 years of service and are entitled for regularization of their service. In this regard, the petitioners have also submitted legal notice dated 17.09.2026 (Annexure P-6). However, no response has been received, so far.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners would be satisfied at this stage if the present petition may be disposed of with a direction to the respondents to consider and decide the aforesaid Legal Notice dated 17.09.2026 (Annexure P-6) in a time bound manner, while keeping in mind judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in Jaggo’s case (supra).
Notice of motion.
Mr. Harish Kumar Nain, DAG, Haryana accepts notice on behalf of respondent-State and submits that he has ‘no objection’ in case, the aforesaid limited prayer of learned counsel for the petitioner is accepted. However, it is submitted by learned State counsel that the service tenure of both the petitioner herein need to be ascertained individually as to whether they have rendered continuous and satisfactory service to make them eligible for regularization.
After hearing learned counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the claim raised by the petitioners in the present petition, the same is disposed of with a direction to the respondents/Competent Authority, concerned, to forthwith consider and decide the aforesaid Legal Notice dated 17.09.2026 (Annexure P-6) by passing a speaking and reasoned order, in accordance with law, within a period of 06 months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order, while keeping in mind the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in Jaggo’s case (supra).
It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the entitlement of the petitioner to the claimed benefit, and the competent authority shall take an independent decision in accordance with the applicable rules and regulations.
Pending application(s) if any also stand(s) disposed of.