IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 112 CWP-11180-2018 Date of Decision : January 21, 2026 BALWINDER SINGH AND ORS. -PETITIONERS V/S STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS. -RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP TIWARI Present: None for the petitioners. Mr. Sahil R. Bakshi, A.A.G., Punjab. *** KULDEEP TIWARI, J. (ORAL) 1. On the previous date of hearing, i.e. 13.01.2026, this Court had passed the following order:- “The petitioners, by way of instant writ petition, pray for issuance of a writ of Mandamus upon the respondents to grant them pay scale of Rs.15000-2640, w.e.f. 01.01.1986, along with all the consequential benefits, in view of the decision dated 22.07.2013, rendered by a Coordinate Bench of this Court in CWP-10978-1993 (Adesh Kumar and others Vs. State of Punjab and others). At the outset, learned State counsel submits that, in compliance to the decision (supra), the case of the petitioners were considered and rejected, vide a speaking order dated 05.01.2015 (Annexure R-1). He further submits that the said speaking order has not been challenged by the petitioners till date. In this view of the matter, the present writ petition is not maintainable. Be that as it may, since none is present on behalf of the petitioners, purely, in the interest of justice, the matter is adjourned to 21.01.2026. To be shown in the urgent list. It is made clear that, on the subsequent date of hearing, no DEVINDER YADAV 2026.01.22 11:05 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment CWP-11180-2018 2 request for adjournment would be entertained on behalf of either side. The Registry is directed to notify the next date of hearing to learned counsel for the petitioners.” 2. As per the office report, learned counsel for the petitioners was informed telephonically about today’s date of hearing. However, even today, there is no appearance on behalf of the petitioners. It appears that either the grievance of the petitioners has already been redressed or they are no longer interested in pursuing the instant writ petition. 3. Consequently, the instant writ petition is dismissed for want of prosecution. (KULDEEP TIWARI) January 21, 2026 JUDGE devinder Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether Reportable : Yes/No DEVINDER YADAV 2026.01.22 11:05 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment