CWP-12710-2025 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 117 CWP-12710-2025 Date of Decision :06.05.2025 Patiala Professional Education Society ...Petitioner Versus The State of Punjab and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI Present: Mr. Aminder Singh, Advocate for petitioner. Mr. T.P.S. Chawla, Senior DAG, Punjab. Ms. Gurmeet Kaur Gill, Senior Panel Counsel for respondent No.6 * * * Harsimran Singh Sethi, J. (Oral) 1. In the present petition, the grievance being raised by the petitioner-institution is that the petitioner-institution is not being given its entitled payment of the dues under the Post Matric Scholarship Scheme, by the respondents. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner-institution submits that the issue raised in the present petition has already been answered by this Court in CWP No.13761 of 2024 titled “Akashdeep and ors. Vs. State of Punjab and ors.” and other connected cases, decided on 09.01.2025 hence, the present petition be also disposed of in therms of the said order. 3. Notice of motion. 4. Mr. T.P.S. Chawla, Senior DAG, Punjab accepts notice on AARTI SHARMA 2025.05.07 10:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-12710-2025 -2- behalf of respondent-State and Ms. Gurmeet Kaur Gill, Senior Panel Counsel accepts notice on behalf of the respondent No.6. 5. Learned counsel for the respondent-State submits he has no objection in case, the present petition is disposed of in terms of CWP No.13761 of 2024 titled “Akashdeep and ors. Vs. State of Punjab and ors.” and other connected cases, decided on 09.01.2025. 6. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No.6 submits that though, the claim raised in the present petition has already been decided by this court while passing order in Akashdeep's case (supra), but the respondent No.6, intends to file an appeal against the said order passed in Akashdeep's case (supra). 7. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the case file with their able assistance. 8. Once, the issue raised in the present petition has already been decided by this Court while passing order in Akashdeep's case (supra), merely that respondent No.6 has decided to file an appeal against the said order passed in Akashdeep's case (supra), does not mean that the claim of the petitioner-Institution, which is akin to one which was raised in Akashdeep's case (supra), should not be disposed of in the same terms so as to avoid discrimination. 9. Keeping in view facts and circumstances of the present case, the present petition is disposed of in the same terms and conditions as stipulated in Akashdeep's case (supra). 10. Civil miscellaneous application pending, if any, stands disposed of. May 06, 2025 (HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI) aarti JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes Whether reportable : No AARTI SHARMA 2025.05.07 10:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document