122 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-1189-2025 Date of Decision: January 17, 2025 Smt. Prem Kanta and others …Pe11oners Versus State of Punjab and others …Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK GUPTA Present:- Mr. Anupam Sharma, Advocate for the peoners. DEEPAK GUPTA , J.(Oral) Respecve husbands of the peoners were appointed as regular Tubewell Operators in the Irrigaon Department in the State of Punjab. The Tubewell Circle of the Irrigaon Branch were transferred to the Punjab State Tubewell Corporaon and the Tubewell Operators of the Irrigaon Department were permanently absorbed w.e.f. 09.12.1983. 2. By way of this peon filed under Arcles 226 and 227 of the Constuon of India, peoners pray for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus by direcng the respondents to grant the family pension to the peoners being widows of the deceased employees of the respondents. 3. It is contended by learned counsel for the peoner that the case of the peoners is squarely covered by the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court dated 17.08.2017 passed in Civil Appeal Nos.4951 and 4952 of 2009 tled as “The State of Punjab and another v. Mohinderjit Kaur (D) Th. L.R.”, whereby the judgment of this Court passed in CWP No.13555 of 1994, tled as “Phullan Rani v. State of Punjab and others” decided on 09.12.2004, was confirmed and it was held that the wives of the Tubewell Operators, who had served as confirmed employees of the Irrigaon Department in the State of Punjab and transferred to the Punjab State Tubewell Corporaon, are entled to the family pension. 4. Learned counsel for the peoners also contends that the similarly situated employees had filed numerous writ peons, which were disposed of by a composite order dated 14.11.2023 (Annexure P-14) by this Sarita Rani 2025.01.17 15:17 I attest to the accuracy of this document/order CWP-1189-2025 - 2 - 2025:PHHC:006574 Court. Peoners also served a legal noce dated 25.11.2024 (Annexure P- 11) to the respondents to grant them the same relief, but no acon has been taken thereon ll date. 5. Noce of moon. 6. Mr. Rajesh Sehgal, Addl. A.G., Punjab accepts noce on behalf of respondent Nos.1 to 3 & 5 – State and Mr. Aman Sharma, Advocate puts in appearance and accepts noce on behalf of respondent No.4. 7. Learned counsel for the respondents have no objecon to take decision on the legal noce dated 25.11.2024 (Annexure P-11), in the light of the judgment dated 14.11.2023 (Annexure P-14) passed by this Court. 8. I have heard learned counsel for the pares and have gone through the file. 9. Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case or the claim being made by the peoner in the present peon, respondent No.4 is hereby directed to consider the grievances put forth by the peoners in the legal noce dated 25.11.2024 (Annexure P-11), in the light of the judgment dated 14.11.2023 (Annexure P-14) passed by this Court, by passing a speaking order within a period of two months from the date of receipt of cerfied copy of this order. Present peon is disposed of accordingly. January 17, 2025 (DEEPAK GUPTA) sarita JUDGE Whether reasoned/speaking: Yes/No Whether reportable: Yes/No Sarita Rani 2025.01.17 15:17 I attest to the accuracy of this document/order