CWP-21421-2024(O&M) with CWP-22122-2024(O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 106+246 Date of Decision: 07.08.2025 1. CM-9054-CWP-2025 and CM-9055-CWP-2025 in/and CWP-21421-2024 VED PARKASH CHUGH AND OTHERS .... Petitioner(s) Versus STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS ... Respondent(s) 2. CM-9436-CWP-2025 and CM-9437-CWP-2025 in/and CWP-22122-2024 DR. RAM KUMAR KHATKAR AND OTHERS .... Petitioner(s) Versus STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS ... Respondent(s) CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA Present: Mr. Vikas Chatrath, Advocate with Mr. Abhishek Singla, Advocate for the applicant/petitioner(s). Mr. Parveen Mehta, Additional Advocate General, Haryana. Mr. Shreenath A. Khemka, Advocate with Ms. Tvesha Gupta, Advocate for the respondent(s)/University. TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA, J. (ORAL) These petitions have been filed, inter alia, seeking a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to grant the benefit of one increment on completion of more than six months in the last year of retirement along with all consequential and pensionary benefits to the petitioners. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner(s) contends that the law in this regard stands settled by a Division Bench of this Court vide judgment dated 24.04.2025, in CWP-14627-2024 titled Mahabir Singh Tanwar v. Aman Dua 2025.08.12 18:16 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this judicial document CWP-21421-2024(O&M) with CWP-22122-2024(O&M) 2 State of Haryana and others. Still, the petitioners’ claim has not been considered, nor has their legal notice, dated 04.07.2024, been decided so far. 3. Learned counsel for the University submits that the pending legal notice, dated 04.07.2024, will be decided by respondent no.4/Registrar, Chaudhary Charan Singh Haryana Agricultural University, by passing a speaking order thereupon within a period of six months, keeping in view the law laid down in Mahabir Singh Tanwar case (supra). 4. In view of the statement made, learned counsel for the petitioners has no objection to the petition(s) being disposed of in terms thereof. 5. Ordered accordingly. 6. In case the order is not passed within the stipulated period, the officer concerned shall pay costs of ₹50,000 to the petitioners. 7. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stand(s) disposed of. 8. A photocopy of this order be placed on the connected file. (TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA) JUDGE 07.08.2025 Ad Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No Aman Dua 2025.08.12 18:16 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this judicial document