IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT 137, 143, 144, 147, 155, 161 1. CWP-17111 Anil Kumar and others vs. State of Punjab and others 2. CWP-17210 Surjit Singh and others vs. State of Punjab and others 3. CWP-17216 Avtar Singh and others vs. State of Punjab and others 4. CWP-17246 Mangal Singh 5. CWP-17407 Satnam Singh 6. CWP-17591 Rachhpal Singh CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMAN Present: Ms. Meenu Mr. Charanpreet Singh, AAG, Punjab *** AMAN CHAUDHARY, J. (Oral) 1. These cases involve similar issues and therefore, are being disposed of together and for the sake of brevity, the facts 17111-2025. 2. Learned counsel submits that the petitioners Inspector from Punjab Roadways Rs.1640-2925 w.e.f. 01.01.1986 in terms of the judgment passed in the case of Daljit Singh and others vs. State of Punjab 26.05.2017 against which LPA filed by the State of Punjab 2018 was also dismissed on 27.02.2019 as also SLP on 17.01.2025. She submits that similarly circumstanced employees have been extended the order dated 21.05.2025 (Annexure P10) pursuant to direction of this Court dated 07.04.2025, regarding which submitted, however, the same has yet not evoked any response. instructions, prays that a direction may be given to the respondents to decide the same in a time bound manne the limited prayer made. IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 137, 143, 144, 147, 155, 161 Date of decision: 01.07.2025 17111-2025 (O&M) Anil Kumar and others vs. State of Punjab and others 210-2025 (O&M) and others vs. State of Punjab and others 216-2025 (O&M) and others vs. State of Punjab and others 17246-2025 (O&M) angal Singh and others vs. State of Punjab and others 17407-2025 (O&M) Satnam Singh and others vs. State of Punjab and others 17591-2025 (O&M) Rachhpal Singh and others vs. State of Punjab and others HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMAN Ms. Meenu, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. Charanpreet Singh, AAG, Punjab *** AMAN CHAUDHARY, J. (Oral) These cases involve similar issues and therefore, are being disposed and for the sake of brevity, the facts Learned counsel submits that the petitioners Inspector from Punjab Roadways, are claiming the benefit of revised pay scale of 2925 w.e.f. 01.01.1986 in terms of the judgment passed in the case of Daljit Singh and others vs. State of Punjab 26.05.2017 against which LPA filed by the State of Punjab 2018 was also dismissed on 27.02.2019 as also SLP on 17.01.2025. She submits that similarly circumstanced employees have been extended the order dated 21.05.2025 (Annexure P10) pursuant to direction of this Court dated 07.04.2025, regarding which a representation , however, the same has yet not evoked any response. instructions, prays that a direction may be given to the respondents to decide the same in a time bound manner, to which learned State counsel has no objection to the limited prayer made. IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision: 01.07.2025 Anil Kumar and others vs. State of Punjab and others and others vs. State of Punjab and others and others vs. State of Punjab and others and others vs. State of Punjab and others and others vs. State of Punjab and others and others vs. State of Punjab and others HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMAN CHAUDHARY , Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Charanpreet Singh, AAG, Punjab. These cases involve similar issues and therefore, are being disposed and for the sake of brevity, the facts are being taken from CWP Learned counsel submits that the petitioners, who retired as are claiming the benefit of revised pay scale of 2925 w.e.f. 01.01.1986 in terms of the judgment passed in the case of Daljit Singh and others vs. State of Punjab, CWP-9175-2000, decided on 26.05.2017 against which LPA filed by the State of Punjab bearing No.659 of 2018 was also dismissed on 27.02.2019 as also SLP on 17.01.2025. She submits that similarly circumstanced employees have been extended the said benefit vide order dated 21.05.2025 (Annexure P10) pursuant to direction of this Court dated a representation dated 15.05.2025, has been , however, the same has yet not evoked any response. She thus, on instructions, prays that a direction may be given to the respondents to decide the r, to which learned State counsel has no objection to These cases involve similar issues and therefore, are being disposed are being taken from CWP- retired as are claiming the benefit of revised pay scale of 2925 w.e.f. 01.01.1986 in terms of the judgment passed in the case of 2000, decided on bearing No.659 of 2018 was also dismissed on 27.02.2019 as also SLP on 17.01.2025. She submits benefit vide order dated 21.05.2025 (Annexure P10) pursuant to direction of this Court dated has been e thus, on instructions, prays that a direction may be given to the respondents to decide the r, to which learned State counsel has no objection to ASHOK KUMAR 2025.07.01 15:44 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-17111-2025 (O&M) -2- 3. In view of the above and without commenting upon the merits of the cases, these petitions are hereby disposed of with a direction to the respondents to decide the representation dated 15.05.2025, within a period of 4 months, taking note of the aforesaid judgment and order dated 21.05.2025 (Annexure P10), which this Court has no reason to believe the authorities would not address in a just, fair and reasonable manner. Upon doing so, after notice and hearing offered to them and if found entitled, grant the benefit forthwith. Needless to say, if the orders are adverse to their interest, the same shall contain reasons and the petitioners shall be free to seek legal redress thereupon. 4. Photocopy of this order be placed on the connected files. ( AMAN CHAUDHARY ) 01.07.2025 JUDGE ashok Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No ASHOK KUMAR 2025.07.01 15:44 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document