230 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision : 10.02.2026 Smt. Rajinder Chohan ….Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPINDER SINGH NALWA Present: Mr. Surender Lamba, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. N.P.S. Hira, DAG, Punjab.

Mr. Anupam Singla, Advocate for respondent No.3.

*****

DEEPINDER SINGH NALWA, J. (Oral)

In the present writ petition, the petitioner is praying for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the order dated 13.08.2021 (Annexure P-5), whereby the claim of the petitioner for counting the period of her contractual service from 13.05.1999 to

14.05.2003 for retiral/pensionary benefits has been rejected.

2. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner was appointed on the post of Project Officer (Punjabi) initially for 06 months on contract basis vide order dated 13.05.1999 (Annexure P-1). The period of contract was extended from time to time. The petitioner was appointed afresh on the same post on regular basis vide appointment letter dated 14.05.2003 (Annexure P-2). The petitioner was to remain on probation for a period of one year which was extendable upto two years. Vide letter dated 04.10.2004 (Annexure P- 3), the service of the petitioner was confirmed w.e.f. 15.05.2003. The petitioner retired on attaining the age of superannuation on 31.03.2020 vide order dated 02.03.2020 (Annexure P-4). After retirement of the petitioner, the petitioner made a representation to the respondents that the earlier period of service rendered by her on contract basis should be taken into consideration as a qualifying service for the purpose of retiral/pensionary benefits. In pursuance of the representation submitted by the petitioner, the respondent No.3 passed an order dated 13.08.2021 (Annexure P-5) whereby the claim of the petitioner for counting of her service rendered on contract basis from 13.05.1999 to 14.05.2003 as qualifying service for the purpose of retiral/pensionary benefits was rejected. Aggrieved against the order dated 13.08.2021 (Annexure P-5), the petitioner has filed the present writ petition.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the earlier service rendered by the petitioner on contract basis w.e.f. 13.05.1999 to 14.05.2003 should be treated as a qualifying service for the purpose of retiral/pensionary benefits. Reliance is made to Rule 3.17 of the Punjab Civil Services Rules Vol. II, as applicable to the petitioner.

4. On the other hand, learned counsel for respondent No.3 submits that the services rendered by the petitioner on contract basis w.e.f. 13.05.1999 to 14.05.2003 cannot be taken into consideration as a qualifying service for the purpose of retiral/pensionary benefits for the reason that the services rendered by the petitioner on contract basis was not followed by regularization. Learned counsel for respondent No.3 further submits that the petitioner was appointed afresh vide appointment letter dated 14.05.2003 (Annexure P-2), as such, the previous service rendered by the petitioner on contract basis has rightly not been taken into consideration for the purpose of retiral/pensionary benefits. It is also the case of learned counsel for respondent No.3 that the appointment on contract basis cannot be held to be a permanent appointment or substantive appointment, as such, on this ground also the service rendered by the petitioner on contract basis cannot be taken into consideration for the purpose of retiral/pensionary benefits.

5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties at length and perused the paper-book along with records.

6. A perusal of the facts of the present case would show that the petitioner was appointed on contract basis for a period of six months on the post of Project Officer (Punjabi) on a fixed salary of Rs.8300/- per month. The contract was extended from time to time. Thereafter, the petitioner was appointed afresh on regular basis vide appointment letter dated 14.05