IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-11803-2026 Date of decision: 20.04.2026 Shindo ....Petitioner Versus The Punjab State Power Corporation Limited and others ....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARPREET SINGH BRAR Present: Mr. Ramesh Chand Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner.

Ms. Priyanka Dhillon, Advocate for the respondents/PSPCL.

HARPREET SINGH BRAR J. (Oral)

1. Prayer in this writ petition filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, is for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus, directing the respondents to regularize the services of the petitioner and grant consequential benefits including pension under Old Pension Scheme as she had rendered service with the respondents as part time Sweeper w.e.f. 1999 till 31.12.2025, keeping in view the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Civil Appeal Nos.3595-3612 of 1999, titled as State of Karnata and others vs Umadevi and others decided on 10.04.2006 reported in S.C.T 2006(2) 462 (Annexure P-5) as well as the Policy dated 04.03.1999 and judgment dated 23.12.2022 passed by the Division Bench of this Court in LPA No.95 of 2019 (Annexure P-6).

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner, inter alia, contends that the petitioner prays for regularization of her services and all consequential benefits including pension under Old Pension Scheme by counting her service as part time Sweeper w.e.f. 1999 till 31.12.2025. Learned counsel for the petitioner relies upon the judgment rendered by the Division Bench of this Court in LPA-95-2019, titled as Punjab State Power Corporation Limited and others vs Surinder Singh and others, decided on 23.12.2022

3. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents/Corporation submits that this Court has already dealt with the issue of regularization of part time Sweeper in extenso and rendered judgment in CWP-7614-2024, titled as Surinder Singh vs Punjab State Power Corporation Limited and others, decided on 22.09.2025, which was upheld by the Division Bench of this Court in intra-court appeal filed by part-time Sweepers in LPA-3004-2025, titled as Nathi Ram and others vs Punjab State Power Corporation Limited and others decided on 11.11.2025. As such, the prayer made by the petitioner cannot be considered.

4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of the record, it transpires that the petitioner was appointed as a part-time Sweeper in the year 1999 and she stood retired on 31.12.2025. Further, the issue raised in the present petition is no longer res integra. This Court has already considered the case of part-time Sweepers in the light of the judgment relied upon by the present petitioner in Surinder Singh’s case (supra) (LPA-95-2019), and dismissed a bunch of petitions filed by part-time Sweepers seeking regularization, lead case being CWP-7614-2024, titled as Surinder Singh vs Punjab State Power Corporation Limited and others, decided on 22.09.2025. The operative part of the said judgment, reads as follows:-

10. The question of whether part-time workers can be regularized is no longer res integra. In the Ilmo Devi’s case (supra) a Two-Judge Bench of the Hon’ble Supreme Court speaking through Justice M.R. Shah has held as follows with regards to the regularization of part-time Sweepers who were working for less than five hours a day: “8.6 In the case of Daya Lal & Ors. (supra) in paragraph

12, it is observed and held as under:-

12. We may at the outset refer to the following well-settled principles relating to regularisation and parity in pay, relevant in the context of these appeals:

(i) The High Courts, in exercising power under Article 226 of the Constitution will not issue directions for regularisation, absorption or permanent continuance, unless the employees claiming regularisation had been appointed in pursuance of a regular recruitment in accordance with relevant rules in an open competitive process, against sanctioned vacant posts. The equality clause contained in Articles 14 and 16