123 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-28624-2025 Date of decision: 24.09.2025 Ram Lubhaya and others ....Petitioners Versus State of Punjab and another ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARPREET SINGH BRAR Present: Mr. Vishal Tartyal, Advocate for Mr. P.P.S. Brar, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Vikas Sonak, AAG, Punjab. Mr. J.S. Toor, Advocate and Mr. Adhiraj Toor, Advocate for respondent No.2. HARPREET SINGH BRAR, J. (ORAL) 1. The present civil writ petition has been filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari, mandamus directing the respondents to grant arrears in accordance with the regular scale plus allowances and further to decide the legal notices. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners inter alia contends that the petitioners were initially engaged as Peon, Sweeper, Driver and Clerks on contractual basis by the Nagar Panchayat, Bikhiwind, in May, 1993. Thereafter, they re-designated as daily wagers vide resolution dated 25.04.1995. In spite of the fact that petitioners are performing duties identical to the regular employees but they were denied parity in pay scale violating the principle of ‘equal pay for equal work’. The issue involved in the present case is squarely covered by the judgment rendered by this Court in CWP No.6747 of 1999 titled as ‘Gurmukh Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab and another’. Neha 2025.09.24 16:00 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-28624-2025 -2- He further submits that he would be satisfied if the legal notices (Annexures P- 2 & P-3) of the petitioners is decided by respondent No.1 by passing a speaking order in a time bound manner. 3. Notice of motion. 4. Mr. Vikas Sonak, AAG, Punjab and Mr. J.S. Toor, Advocate and Mr. Adhiraj Toor, Advocate, put in appearance on behalf of respondent No.1- State and respondent No.2, respectively and submit that they have no objection in case a direction is issued to respondent No.1 for time-bound consideration and decision of the legal notices of the petitioners by passing a speaking order. 5. Therefore, in view of the limited prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioners, respondent No.1 is directed to consider and decide the legal notices dated 04.04.2025 (Annexures P-2 & P-3) of the petitioners in terms of the judgment rendered by this Court in CWP No.6747 of 1999 titled as ‘Gurmukh Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab and another’ (Annexure P-5) and pass a speaking order, after affording them an opportunity to be heard, within a period of 03 months from the date of receiving a certified copy of this order. Further, the decision taken thereof shall be conveyed to the petitioners. Needless to say, if the petitioners are found entitled to the relief sought, the same shall be granted forthwith by respondent No.1. 6. Disposed of, accordingly. (HARPREET SINGH BRAR) JUDGE 24.09.2025 Neha Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No Neha 2025.09.24 16:00 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document