IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT 130 Santokh Singh State of Punjab CORAM: HON Present : AMAN CHAUDHARY, J. (ORAL) 1. scale of Rs.5000 2. decided by this Court in CWP Mahajan vs. State of Punjab and Others against which the LPA on 30.11.2023, Annexure P 29.08.2024, vide which the clerks were granted the pay grade of Rs.5000 8100/- as also in the case of and others LPA-1729-2012, filed by the State, was also dismissed on 05.02.2014 and which stood upheld by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in SLP IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Santokh Singh Versus f Punjab and others CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE AMAN CHAUDHARY Mr. Nitesh Singla, Advocate, for the petitioner. Ms. Shruti, AAG, Punjab. AMAN CHAUDHARY, J. (ORAL) Prayer made is for directing the respondents to grant pay scale of Rs.5000-8100 w.e.f. 01.01.1996, to the petitioner. Learned counsel submits that the issue already stands decided by this Court in CWP-23551- Mahajan vs. State of Punjab and Others against which the LPA-1901-2023 filed by the State was also dismissed 2023, Annexure P-14, which was implemented vide order dated 29.08.2024, vide which the clerks were granted the pay grade of Rs.5000 as also in the case of Anil Kumar and others vs. State of Punjab and others, CWP-22422-2010, decided on 16.05.2012, a 2012, filed by the State, was also dismissed on 05.02.2014 and which stood upheld by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in SLP IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-19862-2025 (O & M) Date of decision: 17.07.2025 ....Petitioner ...Respondents BLE MR. JUSTICE AMAN CHAUDHARY Prayer made is for directing the respondents to grant pay , to the petitioner. Learned counsel submits that the issue already stands -2019 titled as Raj Kumar Mahajan vs. State of Punjab and Others, decided on 20.12.2022, 2023 filed by the State was also dismissed 14, which was implemented vide order dated 29.08.2024, vide which the clerks were granted the pay grade of Rs.5000- Anil Kumar and others vs. State of Punjab 2010, decided on 16.05.2012, against which 2012, filed by the State, was also dismissed on 05.02.2014 and which stood upheld by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in SLP-21590-2014, PARVEEN KUMAR 2025.07.17 18:28 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CWP-19862-2025 -2- decided on 07.01.2015. Thus on the same analogy, the petitioner, who was working on the higher post of Junior Assistant, is entitled to one step higher grade i.e. Rs.5000-8100/-. In this regard, a legal notice dated 12.03.2025, Annexure P-10, has been served upon respondents, but the same has yet not evoked any response. He thus, at this stage, on instructions from the petitioner, prays that a direction be given to the respondents to decide the same in a time bound manner, to which learned State counsel has no objection. 3. In view of the above and without commenting on the merits of the case, this petition is hereby disposed of with a direction to the respondents to decide the legal notice dated 12.03.2025, taking note of the afore-referred order and judgments, within a period of 4 months, 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 him and if found entitled, grant the benefit forthwith. Needless to say, if the orders are adverse to his interest, the same shall contain reasons and the petitioner shall be free to seek legal redress thereupon. 17.07.2025 (AMAN CHAUDHARY) parveen kumar JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes / No Whether reportable : Yes / No PARVEEN KUMAR 2025.07.17 18:28 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.