IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision : 18.02.2026 KANWALJIT SINGH ...... Petitioner VERSUS GURU NANAK DEV UNIVERSITY THROUGH ITS REGISTRAR ...... Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPINDER SINGH NALWA ***

Present :- Mr. Vivek Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. M. K. Dogra, Advocate for the respondent.

***

Deepinder Singh Nalwa, J. (Oral)

1. In the present writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the orders dated 07.11.2013 (Annexure P-7), 12.11.2014 (Annexure P-9) and 23.09.2015 (Anneuxre P-12) vide which, the claim of petitioner for counting the previous service rendered by him prior to regularization, has been rejected.

2. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner was appointed as a Clerk on regular basis on 20.02.1980 in Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar (hereinafter referred to as the 'University'). The petitioner was dismissed from service vide order dated 31.03.1999 (Annexure P-1). Aggrieved against the above said order, the petitioner submitted a representation to the University. The representation was duly considered and the petitioner was offered appointment on ad hoc basis. Consequently, the petitioner was again appointed on ad hoc basis on the post of Clerk vide order dated 20.07.1999 (Annexure P-3). Petitioner was promoted on the post of Clerk/Junior Assistant on 11.06.2004 and thereafter was further promoted as Senior Assistant on 04.02.2010. The petitioner, after attaining the age of superannuation, was relieved from service on 30.11.2013.

3. After being relieved from service, the petitioner submitted a representation dated 16.09.2013 (Annexure P-6) for grant of pension and other retiral benefits, as he has completed more than 10 years of service on regular basis. The said representation was duly considered by the respondent-University and was rejected vide order dated 07.11.2013 (Annexure P-7). The petitioner thereafter submitted another representation dated 23.12.2013 and subsequently a mercy appeal dated 05.09.2014 (Annexure P-8), reiterating that since he had completed more than 10 years of regular service, the petitioner was entitled for grant of retiral benefits.

4 As no decision was taken thereon by the respondent-University, the petitioner filed CWP No.22817 of 2014 before this Court seeking release of retiral benefits. During the pendency of the said writ petition, the respondents again passed an order dated 12.11.2014 (Annexure P-9), whereby the claim of the petitioner was again rejected. In view of the above said order, the petitioner withdrew the said writ petition. Aggrieved against the order dated 12.11.2014 (Annexure P-9), the petitioner again filed CWP No.9022 of 2015 before this Court. The said writ petition was disposed of on 08.05.2015 (Annexure P-10) with a direction to the respondents to consider the case of petitioner in terms of Civil Writ Petition No.14088 of 2012 titled as “Sat Parkash Vs. State of Haryana and others”, decided on

09.10.2013.

5. In compliance with the directions issued by this Court, the respondents passed an order dated 23.09.2015 (Annexure P-12) wherein the claim of the petitioner was once again rejected in regard to grant of retiral benefits i.e.pension. Aggrieved against the orders dated 07.11.2013 (Annexure P-7), 12.11.2014 (Annexure P-9) and 23.09.2015 (Anneuxre P-

12), the petitioner has filed the present writ petition.

6. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that petitioner was appointed on regular basis and thereafter was promoted on higher posts, since the petitioner has completed more than 10 years of regular service, as such, he is entitled for grant of pension in terms of the rules as applicable to the petitioner.

7. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent-University submits that although the petitioner was promoted on the posts of Clerk/Junior Assistant and Senior Assistant, his services were never regularized after his appointment afresh on ad hoc basis.