AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
SANDEEP MOUDGIL, J (ORAL)
Since the earlier counsel has been elevated to the Bench, Ms. Palak Sharma, Advocate, PH/2647/2024, Mobile No. 7009659207, is appointed as Amicus Curiae to assist the Court. The necessary fee of the learned Amicus Curiae shall be paid by the High Court Legal Services Committee.
The jurisdiction of this Court has been invoked under Article 226 of the Constitution of India with a prayer that this Court may kindly issue a writ of or in nature of Mandamus directing respondents to regularize the services of petitioners who have been working with respondent department as MPHW(F) against sanctioned posts w.e.f. 01.10.2009 (Annexure P-6) continuously (in view of the policy dated 18.03.2011 (Annexure P-15)) and in view of order dated 27.02.2024 (Annexure P-23) passed by this Court in CWP No. 6784 of 2017 filed by petitioners wherein the issue of regularization was left open while granting Equal Pay for Equal Work' to petitioners and order dated 05.09.2023 passed by this Court in CWP-14734-2020 (Annexure P-22) whereby the petition filed by petitioners was disposed of in terms therein and further in view of letter dated 16.11.2025 (Annexure P-28) and judgment 09.01.2025 (Annexure P-29) passed by this Court in CWP-11499 of 2021 whereby the services of similarly situated employees working on contract basis under department of Health and Family Welfare were regularized based on policy dated 18.03.2011 (Annexure P-15) dehors alleged cancellation of said policy dated 18.03.2011, vide letter dated 03.06.2026 (Annexure-P-30), whereas the petitioners in CWP-11499-2021 titled as Rakhal and Ors. Vs. State of Punjab and Anr.' had been working with respondent department w.e.f. 01.01.2014 and present petitioners had been working since 01.10.2009, in the interest of justice.
Notice of motion to the official respondents only.
Mr. T.P.S. Walia, AAG, Punjab, has put in appearance on behalf of the respondent-State of Punjab and submits that the petitioners have never approached the respondent-authorities by way of any representation seeking the aforesaid relief and have directly approached this Court for issuance of a writ in the nature of Mandamus/Certiorari.
Be that as it may, it is a settled principle of law that, before invoking the writ jurisdiction of this Court under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, a person seeking a writ of mandamus ought to first approach the competent authority by way of a representation, calling upon it to take a decision on their claim.
However, without going into the merits of the controversy, the respondent-competent authority is directed to treat the present petition as a representation and to consider and decide each and every plea raised therein, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. A copy of the reasoned and speaking order so passed shall be supplied to the petitioners within one week thereafter.
The present petition stands disposed of in the above terms.