Teacher Appointed In 2008 Can Opt For Old Pension Scheme As P&H HC Finds 2006 Re-Advertisement Continued 2005 Recruitment Process

Swati Devi applied for the post of Home Science Mistress under an advertisement dated 1 July 2005.

After that recruitment was withdrawn, the posts were re-advertised on 20 July 2006.

A note to the later advertisement preserved the eligibility of candidates who had applied under the 2005 advertisement, with eligibility reckoned as of 1 July 2005.

Swati was appointed in December 2008 and, under the New Pension Scheme, sought coverage under the Old Pension Scheme (OPS) pursuant to the Haryana Government Office Memorandum dated 8 May 2023.

The Department rejected her claim because her appointment and the re-advertisement occurred after the relevant dates.

She challenged that decision under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution.

The Office Memorandum dated 8 May 2023 provides for consideration under the Haryana Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 2016, instead of the New Defined Contributory Pension Scheme, for employees recruited against posts or vacancies advertised or notified on or before 28 October 2005, even if appointed thereafter.

In Om Parkash v. State of Haryana and Others, CWP-20263-2024 and connected matters, decided 9 July 2026, the Court held that a later advertisement may be treated as a continuation—not a de novo recruitment—where the original pre-cut-off advertisement is preserved through terms such as an eligibility-saving note.

In that circumstance, the recruitment’s pre-cut-off origin may satisfy the Office Memorandum.

The Court distinguished Sandeep Kumar v. State of Haryana and Others, CWP-36834-2025, decided 22 December 2025, because it concerned a challenge to the cut-off date itself, not the effect of a re-advertisement.

The Court found that Swati had applied under the 1 July 2005 advertisement and that the 2006 advertisement preserved the eligibility of those earlier applicants.

Applying Om Parkash, it treated the later advertisement as a continuation of the original recruitment, rather than an independent process.

The recruitment therefore had its genesis before the 28 October 2005 cut-off.

The Department’s reliance on the later advertisement and appointment dates was a hyper-technical reading that ignored the recruitment’s original commencement and the purpose of the Office Memorandum.

Sandeep Kumar did not govern because it addressed a different issue.

She may exercise her option to switch to OPS within six weeks of receiving a certified copy of the order.

The respondents must then process her claim and re-fix or release consequential pensionary or retiral benefits, including arrears, within a further six weeks; amounts already contributed or paid under the New Pension Scheme are to be adjusted in accordance with law.

The petitions were heard and decided by a common judgment, with a photocopy of the order directed to be placed on the files of the connected cases.