AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
HARPREET SINGHHARPREET SINGH BRARBRAR, J. (Oral), J. (Oral)
This Civil Writ Petition has been filed under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India seeking issuance of a writ of Certiorari for quashing the impugned letter dated 24.10.2025 (Annexure P-8), whereby the full length of service of Late Dr. Santosh Bhardwaj has been declined to be counted as qualifying service, and for issuance of a writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to re-fix her pensionary and retiral benefits by counting her entire service from the date of her initial appointment, in terms of the judgment dated 29.04.2019 (Annexure P-3) passed in CWP No.22558 of 2016, Suraj Parkash Bajaj v. State of Haryana, along with all consequential benefits.
On 11.03.2026, following order was passed:-
“Learned State counsel, appearing on advance notice, seeks an adjournment to get instructions so as to enable the Department to examine the petitioner’s case for counting qualifying service of his wife from the date of initial appointment in the College, i.e., 19.09.1997, in the light of judgment, dated 29.04.2019, rendered by this Court in CWP-22558-2016 titled Suraj Parkash Bajaj v. State of Haryana and others. Adjourned to 08.04.2026”
Mr. Pratyush Sood, Advocate has filed power of attorney on behalf of respondent No.3, which is taken on record. Registry is directed to tag the same at appropriate place.
The respondents have already placed on record written instructions dated 28.07.2026 before this Court on 29.07.2026 which was taken on record as Mark “X”. Learned State counsel submits that a perusal of the same clearly indicates that the claim of the petitioner was considered in the light of the judgment rendered by this Court in LPA No.24 of 2021LPA No.24 of 2021, titled as State of Haryana and another v. SurajState of Haryana and another v. Suraj Parkash Bajaj and another,Parkash Bajaj and another, whereby the judgment rendered by the Coordinate Bench in Suraj Parkash Bajaj v. State of HaryanaSuraj Parkash Bajaj v. State of Haryana, CWPCWP No.22558 of 2016No.22558 of 2016, was modified. Further, in terms of the judgment rendered by the Division Bench in the aforesaid LPA No.24 of 2021, the petitioner was asked to deposit the amount of CPF (employee's share) for consideration of the full length of service of his wife from the date of her initial appointment. However, the petitioner has not complied with the same. In view of the above, nothing survives in the present writ petition.
Learned State counsel further submits that, despite the communication and reminder, the petitioner has not done the needful.
In view of the above, nothing survives in the present writ petition, and the same is disposed of accordingly.
However, the petitioner would be at liberty to approach the respondents after depositing the amount in question.
Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.