##PAGE1##

1 CWP-10065-2026 & CWP-10114-2026

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

127+133 Date of Decision: 06.04.2026

1. CWP-10065-2026

Rajesh Kumar and others .....Petitioners

VERSUS

Dakshin Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam ..Respondent

2. CWP-10114-2026 Mukesh Kumar and others

….Petitioners Versus

State of Haryana and others ….Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARPREET SINGH BRAR

Present : Mr. R.K. Malik, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Sandeep Dhull, Advocate for the petitioners in CWP-10065-2026.

Mr. Nikhil Lather, Advocate for the petitioners in CWP-10114-

2026.

Mr. Saurabh Girdhar, AAG, Haryana-State in CWP-10014-

2026.

Mr. R.K Chaudhary with Mr. Sukhdeep Parmar, Advocates for the respondent in CWP-10065-2026.

Mr. Prince Singh, Advocate for respondents No.2 to 4 in CWP-

10114-2026.

PUNEET CHAWLA 2026.04.09 18:00 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

2 CWP-10065-2026 & CWP-10114-2026

HARPREET SINGH BRAR, J. (Oral)

1. This order shall dispose of the above-mentioned writ petitions as they arise from a similar factual matrix. However, for the sake of brevity,

the facts are taken from CWP-10065-2026.

2. The present writ petition(s) has been filed under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India for issuance of an appropriate writ or order in the nature of certiorari to quash the action of respondent by which the representation of petitioners dated 21.08.2023 (Annexure P-4) has been filed. Further praying for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent to consider the claim of the petitioners under Old

Pension Scheme.

3. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners, inter alia, contends that the petitioners had applied pursuant to Advertisement No.08/2004 dated 28.10.2004 for recruitment to 776 posts of Assistant Linemen, which were subsequently increased to 1373 posts vide corrigendum dated 08.11.2004. It is submitted that the said posts were thereafter re-advertised on 19.10.2006 with a specific stipulation that candidates who had applied earlier would also be considered eligible against the re-advertised posts. The petitioners were ultimately appointed and joined the post of Assistant Linemen between 21.08.2007 and 27.08.2007. It is further contended that the Government of Haryana, Department of Finance, issued a circular dated 08.05.2023 (Annexure P-3), clarifying that employees recruited against posts advertised

PUNEET CHAWLA 2026.04.09 18:00 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

3 CWP-10065-2026 & CWP-10114-2026

on or before 28.10.2005 shall be governed by the Old Pension Scheme. Learned Senior Counsel submits that the controversy involved in the present case is squarely covered by the judgment of the Delhi High Court in Dr. Davinder Singh Brar vs. Union of India, WP (C) No.756 of 2020, decided on 28.01.2020 (Annexure P-1), wherein it has been held that where the advertisement was issued during the subsistence of the Old Pension Scheme, the appointees would be governed by the said scheme notwithstanding the fact that their appointments were made after the introduction of the New Pension Scheme. The said judgment was upheld by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Union of India and others vs. Dr. Davinder Singh Brar, SLP (C)

No.173 of 2021, decided on 04.02.2021 (Annexure P-2).

3.1 It is also submitted that the petitioners had submitted representations dated 21.08.2023 and 22.08.2005 (Annexures P-4 and P-5), which have not been considered by the respondents. Learned Senior Counsel argues that since the petitioners had applied pursuant to the advertisement dated 28.10.2004, when the Old Pension Scheme was in force, and the re- advertisement dated 19.10.2006 expressly preserved the eligibility of earlier applicants, the petitioners are entitled to be governed by the Old Pension Scheme. It is further contended that the Board of Directors of the Nigam took a decision to adopt the New Pension Scheme only on 31.08.2009 (Annexure P-6), for employees appointed on or after 01.01.2