130 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-15566-2025 (O&M) Date of Decision:27.05.2025 DAV COLLEGE TRUST AND MANAGEMENT SOCIETY, CHITRA GUPTA ROAD, NEW DELHI ...Petitioner Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS ...Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI Present: Ms. Neelam Choudhary, Advocate for Mr. Rajiv Kataria, Advocate for the petitioner. HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI , J. (Oral) 1. 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. 2. Notice of motion. 3. Ms. Gurmeet Kaur Gill, Senior Panel Counsel, U.T. Chandigarh accepts notice on behalf of respondent No.1, and Mr. T.P.S. Chawla, Senior Deputy Advocate General, Punjab, who is present in Court, accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State. 4. 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. KUMUD VERMA 2025.05.29 10:36 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CWP-15566-2025 (O&M) -2- 5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of 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 respondents intend to file an appeal against the said order passed in Akashdeep's case (supra). 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the case file with their able assistance. 7. 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 respondents have 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. 8. 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). 9. Civil miscellaneous application pending, if any, stands disposed of. (HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI) JUDGE 27.05.2025 kv Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No KUMUD VERMA 2025.05.29 10:36 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh