PARAMJIT KAUR vs STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS — CWP/11841/2026

Case under Constitution of India Section 226. Disposed: --DISPOSED OF on 21st April 2026.

Case disposed Next hearing 21-Apr-2026

CNR: PHHC010627012026

e-Filing Number

16-04-2026

Filing Number

CWP/22352/2026

Filing Date

16-Apr-2026

Registration No

CWP/11841/2026

Registration Date

18-Apr-2026

Judge

Mr. Justice Namit Kumar

Coram

Mr. Justice Namit Kumar

Category

68.7 - SERVICE-EDU-PUNJAB(SECONDARY)(TGT) ( 796 )

Judicial Branch

WRITS -I BRANCH

Decision Date

21-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

--DISPOSED OF

Last updated 28-May-2026

Acts & Sections

Constitution of India Section 226

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.PARAMJIT KAUR

    Adv. Amrindra Pratap Singh

  2. 2.State of Punjab and Others

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS

  2. 2.State of Punjab and Others

  3. 3.Director of Public Instructions

  4. 4.District Education Officer

  5. 5.The Principal,

  6. 6.The Principal

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 21-Apr-2026

    Mr. Justice Namit KumarView PDF

    Case Summary: CWP-11841-2026 Paramjit Kaur sought mandamus directing the State of Punjab to consider her pension under the Old Pension Scheme 2004, counting her entire service from May 1995 onwards, claiming 30+ years of continuous service including pre-regularization period. The court disposed the petition without deciding merits, directing the respondents to consider and decide her pending representation (dated 12.11.2025) expeditiously within 2 months with a speaking order and opportunity of hearing, with the decision to be conveyed to the petitioner. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 16-Apr-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. CWP/11841/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: CWP-11841-2026 Paramjit Kaur sought mandamus directing the State of Punjab to consider her pension under the Old Pension Scheme 2004, counting her entire service from May 1995 onwards, claiming 30+ years of continuous service including pre-regularization period. The court disposed the petition without deciding merits, directing the respondents to consider and decide her pending representation (dated 12.11.2025) expeditiously within 2 months with a speaking order and opportunity of hearing, with the decision to be conveyed to the petitioner. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case