CWP-19982 CWP-19984 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA Jagjit Singh and others State of Punjab and Sunil Nanglu and others State of Punjab and another CORAM: Present: KULDEEP TIWARI 1. both these writ petitions are amenable to be decided together. for the facility of reference, facts are being 2025. 2. Article 226 of the Constitution of India, upon the respondents to the Punjab Educational (Teaching Cadre) Group i.e. 10300 allowances, as applicable under the 5 light of the decision dated 13.09.2024, rendered in (Saurabh Sharma and others Vs. State of Punjab and another), also the instructions dated 05.01.2026 (Annexure P 19982-2026 (O&M) -1- 19984-2026 (O&M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Jagjit Singh and others Versus State of Punjab and another Sunil Nanglu and others Versus State of Punjab and another CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP TIWARI Ms. Pavneet Kaur, Advocate, and Ms. Gurleen Kaur, Advocate, for the petitioners. **** KULDEEP TIWARI, J. (Oral) At the outset, learned counsel for the both these writ petitions are amenable to be decided together. facility of reference, facts are being The petitioners, by way of instant writ petition, as cast under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, pray for issuance the respondents to grant them pay scale and allowances, in terms of Punjab Educational (Teaching Cadre) Group i.e. 10300-34800+5000 Grade Pay, Initial Pay;18450, along with all allowances, as applicable under the 5th Punjab Pay Scale Matrix, in th light of the decision dated 13.09.2024, rendered in (Saurabh Sharma and others Vs. State of Punjab and another), also the instructions dated 05.01.2026 (Annexure P IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-19982-2026 (O&M) Date of decision: 06.07.2026 ….Petitioners ….Respondents CWP-19984-2026 (O&M) ….Petitioners ….Respondents KULDEEP TIWARI Ms. Pavneet Kaur, Advocate, and , Advocate, counsel for the petitioners submits that both these writ petitions are amenable to be decided together. However, facility of reference, facts are being derived from CWP-29457- , by way of instant writ petition, as cast under pray for issuance of a Mandamus grant them pay scale and allowances, in terms of Punjab Educational (Teaching Cadre) Group-C Service Rules, 2018, 34800+5000 Grade Pay, Initial Pay;18450, along with all Punjab Pay Scale Matrix, in the light of the decision dated 13.09.2024, rendered in CWP-15896-2023 (Saurabh Sharma and others Vs. State of Punjab and another), and also the instructions dated 05.01.2026 (Annexure P-1). .2026 s ….Respondents petitioners submits that However, - , by way of instant writ petition, as cast under of a Mandamus grant them pay scale and allowances, in terms of C Service Rules, 2018, 34800+5000 Grade Pay, Initial Pay;18450, along with all e 2023 and AMIT KUMAR 2026.07.07 18:05 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document CWP-19982 CWP-19984 3. petitioner respondent authorities, vide legal notice 18.03.2026 (Annexure P However, authorities concerned, response, despite lapse of a 4. 5. Punjab, accepts notice on behalf of the At the outset, he fairly submits that he has no objection, in case, a Mandamus is passed upon the respondent the legal notice 5. prayer has been made petitions authority amongst the respondents notices (Annexure P of six weeks 6. hereinabove direction application/motion for revival of the instant petition 7. case. 06.07.2026 Ak Sharma 19982-2026 (O&M) -2- 19984-2026 (O&M) Learned counsel for the petitioner petitioners, in both these petitions, respondent authorities, vide legal notice 18.03.2026 (Annexure P-9), as regards However, owing to a lackadaisical and indolent approach of the authorities concerned, the legal notices (supra) h response, despite lapse of a considerable time Notice of motion. Mr. Sahil R. Bakshi, learned Assistant Advocate General, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents At the outset, he fairly submits that he has no objection, in case, a Mandamus is passed upon the respondent legal notice (supra). In view of the above, and since a prayer has been made on behalf of the petitioner are disposed of, by issuing a Mandamus upon authority amongst the respondents, to consider and decide the Annexure P-9), by passing a speaking order six weeks from the receipt of a certified copy of this order. However, in the event of hereinabove direction, the petitioners are application/motion for revival of the instant petition A photocopy of this order be placed on the file of connected .2026 Whether speaking/reasoned Whether reportable Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the had already approached the respondent authorities, vide legal notices dated 21.03.2026 and as regards their concerned/grievances. owing to a lackadaisical and indolent approach of the (supra) have failed to evoke any considerable time. Sahil R. Bakshi, learned Assistant Advocate General, respondents and waives service. At the outset, he fairly submits that he has no objection, in case, a Mandamus is passed upon the respondents, to take a final decision upon ince a bona fide and innocuous the petitioners, the instant writ by issuing a Mandamus upon the competent to consider and decide the legal by passing a speaking order(s), within a period from the receipt of a certified copy of this order. in the event of default in compliance of the are at liberty to move an apt application/motion for revival of the instant petitions. A photocopy of this order be placed on the file of connected (KULDEEP TIWARI) JUDGE Yes Yes/No submits that the the 21.03.2026 and . owing to a lackadaisical and indolent approach of the failed to evoke any Sahil R. Bakshi, learned Assistant Advocate General, and waives service. At the outset, he fairly submits that he has no objection, in case, a cision upon innocuous , the instant writ the competent legal within a period default in compliance of the at liberty to move an apt A photocopy of this order be placed on the file of connected AMIT KUMAR 2026.07.07 18:05 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document