Ritu & Ors. vs State Of Haryana & Ors.

HARPREET SINGH BRAR, J. (ORAL)

With the consent of parties, this common order shall dispose of the aforementioned civil writ petitions as they arise from a similar factual matrix. However, for the sake of brevity, the facts are taken from CWP-36055-2026.

The present civil writ petition(s) has been filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the impugned action of the respondent vide which the new pension scheme has been made applicable to the petitioners, despite the fact that the petitioners are entitled for the benefits of Old Pension Scheme since the petitioners have been appointed on the post of PGT/TGT/PTI/JBT/DPE/C&V pursuant to advertisement No.1/2005 published on 07.07.2005 (Annexure P-1), re-advertised vide advertisement No.06/2006 dated 20.07.2006 (Annexure P-5), thereby, quashing memo dated 25.09.2023 (Annexure P-14) and 25.10.2023 (Annexure P-15) vide which respondent No.2 has declined the benefit of switch over to Old Pension Scheme on the ground that the C&V Teachers and Trained Graduate Teacher are not titled for said switch over.

Learned counsel for the petitioners inter alia contends that the petitioners participated in the selection process initiated by Advertisement No.01/2005 dated 07.07.2005 (Annexure P-1). However, the selection process was not taken to its logical conclusion. Thereafter, the posts were carried forward and re-advertised vide Advertisement No.06/2006 on 20.07.2006 (Annexure P-5), wherein, the eligibility of the candidates of erstwhile advertisement were specifically preserved. The petitioners were appointed and have been serving as such. The Government of Haryana issued Office Memorandum dated 08.05.2023 (Annexure P-11) clarifying that employees recruited against posts advertised on or before 28.10.2005 are entitled to Old Pension Scheme. The petitioners exercised their option in terms of the Office Memorandum ibid within the stipulated period for shifting to Old Pension Scheme as is discernible from Annexure P-12. The issue raised in the present writ petition is squarely covered by judgment rendered by this Court in CWP-20263-2024 titled as Om Parkash vs. State of Haryana and others, decided on 09.07.2026 (Annexure P-16).

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 by the competent authority (either respondent No.2 or 3) in the light of judgment rendered by this Court in Om Parkash’s case (supra) in a time-bound manner, by passing a speaking order after affording the petitioners an opportunity of being heard.

Learned State counsel, on receipt of advance notice, appears on behalf of the respondent-State and submits that the grievance raised by the petitioners in the present writ petition(s) would be considered by passing a reasoned speaking order in accordance with the law by respondents No.2 and 3/competent authority.

In view of the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the aforementioned all the writ petitions are disposed of with a direction to the respondents No.2 and 3/competent authority to treat the present writ petitions as a comprehensive representations and to consider the claim of the petitioners in the light of Om Parkash’s case (supra) by passing a reasoned and speaking order after affording the petitioners an opportunity of hearing within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of 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 the respondents No.2 and 3/competent authority.

A photo copy of this order be placed on the file of connected cases.