CWP No. 16077 of 2025 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH (138) CWP No. 16077 of 2025 Date of Decision : 28.05.2025 Guru Teg Bahadur Institute of Management & Technology ...Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI Present: Mr. Sameer Sachdeva, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. T.P.S. Chawla, Senior Deputy Advocate General, Punjab. Ms. Divya Sharma, Senior Panel Counsel for respondent No. 4. *** Harsimran Singh Sethi J. (Oral) 1. In the present petition, the grievance being raised by the petitioner is that the petitioner-Institution is not being given its entitled payment of the dues under the SC 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 terms of the said order. 3. Notice of motion. 4. Mr. T.P.S. Chawla, Senior Deputy Advocate General, Punjab accepts notice on behalf of respondent-State and Ms. Divya Sharma, Advocate, Senior Panel Counsel accepts notice on behalf of respondent No. 4. Kanchan 2025.05.28 17:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment CWP No. 16077 of 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. 4 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. 4, 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. 4 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-Institutions, 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). May 28, 2025 (HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI) kanchan JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes Whether reportable : No Kanchan 2025.05.28 17:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment