122 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-14767-2025 Date of Decision: 21.05.2025 DAV COLLEGE TRUST AND MANAGEMENT SOCIETY, CHITRA GUPTA ROAD, NEW DELHI AND OTHERS ... PETITIONERS VS. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS .. RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI Present: Mr. Sachin Kalia, Advocate for Mr. Rajdeep Singh Cheema, Advocate,for the petitioners. Ms. Gurmeet Kaur Gill, Senior Panel Counsel for respondent-UOI. Mr. T.P.S Chawla, Sr. DAG Punjab. *** HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI, J. (Oral) 1. In the present petition, the grievance being raised by the petitioners is that the petitioner(s)-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 petitioners-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 terms of the said order. 3. Notice of motion. 4. Ms. Gurmeet Kaur Gill, Senior Panel Counsel accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-Union of India and Mr. T.P.S. Chawla, Senior DAG, Punjab accepts notice on behalf of respondent-State. SMRITI 2025.05.23 09:34 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment CWP-14767-2025 -2- 5. Learned counsel for the respondents submits they have 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.1-Union of India 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.1-Union of India, 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.1-Union of India has decided to file an appeal against the said order passed in Akashdeep's case (supra), does not mean that the claim of the petitioners-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. 21.05.2025 (HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI) smriti JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether Reportable : Yes/No SMRITI 2025.05.23 09:34 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment