CWP-20495-2026 (O&M) 1 of 4 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 122 CWP-20495-2026 (O&M) Date of decision: 09.07.2026 Tripta Rani Chawla and another ...Petitioner(s) Vs. State of Haryana and others ...Respondent(s) CORAM: HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA Present:- Ms. Bhanu Bains, Advocate for Mr. Parminder Singh, Advocate for the petitioners. Ms. Ruchi Sekhri, Addl.A.G., Haryana. *** NIDHI GUPTA, J. Present Civil Writ Petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioners for issuance of a writ in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondents to remove anomalies of the pay scale from the date anomalies have started i.e. 01.01.2006 instead of removing anomalies w.e.f. 01.01.2016; and the petitioners may be granted all the consequential benefits along with interest in reference to the representation dated 25.05.2026 (P-6) moved by the petitioner and Judgment dated 12.07.2024 (P-4) passed by this Court in CWP No.19376 of 2021; and upheld by the Division Bench vide judgment dated 2.6.2026 (Annexure P-5), passed in LPA-2027-2025. 2. Learned counsel contended that the petitioners, appointed as Lab Technicians in the Health Department, Haryana, were granted the same DIVYANSHI 2026.07.10 17:36 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-20495-2026 (O&M) 2 of 4 pay scale as that of Radiographers, which continued to be the case until 2009, when that of the latter was made higher. The Pay Anomalies Commission (hereafter referred to as 'Commission') constituted to address the concerns regarding it, on 24.07.2015 recommended the same pay band to both categories. The Government upgraded the pay scale, though, w.e.f. 01.01.2016, without there being any justification for the anomaly not being removed from the date it began i.e. 01.01.2006. 3. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioners that similar issue had come up for consideration before the Coordinate Bench of this Court in CWP-19376-2021 titled as Ramesh Kumar and others vs. State of Haryana and another; wherein Coordinate Bench vide judgment dated 12.07.2024 has held as under: - “10. That the pay scale wherein the anomaly had arisen was released from 01.01.2006, it is bound to be corrected from the said date and not with effect from the date when it was discovered, or prospectively with effect from a date of the choice of the employer. Once a mistake is acknowledged to have been committed, whereby an anomaly has arisen, it has to be remedied in such a manner, that the aggrieved does not have any adverse effect of the same, which is its correction retrospectively. 11. It is evident that parity between the pay scales of Radiographers and Lab Technicians was maintained throughout, from 1976 right uptil 2009, when the former were granted a scale higher than the latter. The Commission, constituted to look into the grievances stemming out from this action, accepted the plea of the employees while taking into consideration the duties and responsibilities of both posts and DIVYANSHI 2026.07.10 17:36 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-20495-2026 (O&M) 3 of 4 recommended the same pay band for them. The State, without listing any cogent reasons, imposed a cut off date of 2016 for grant of the due instead of 2006. It is thus iniquitous and unacceptable in law as the same does not stand the test of Article 14 of the Constitution of India, which postulates equality before the law and equal protection of the laws. 12. On an analysis of the factual matrix, in light of the afore- referred judgments, the respondents were required to revise the pay scale of the petitioners from 01.01.2006, when the anomaly arose and grant them consequential benefits flowing therefrom. 13. The writ petition is accordingly allowed.” 4. Against the said judgment, an LPA No. 2027 of 2025 titled as State of Haryana and others vs. Ramesh Kumar and others, has been filed by the respondent-State, which has been dismissed by Division Bench vide judgment dated 02.02.2026 (Annexure P-5). 5. Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that therefore, the present case is clearly covered by the law laid down by this Court vide the above said judgments. Learned counsel for the petitioners further pray that the petitioners shall be satisfied if the present Writ Petition is allowed in terms of above said judgments. 6. Learned State counsel is prima facie unable to dispute the applicability of the aforesaid judgments to the facts of the present cases and submits that she has no objection in case the present Petition is allowed as above. DIVYANSHI 2026.07.10 17:36 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-20495-2026 (O&M) 4 of 4 7. No other argument is raised on behalf of the parties. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case file in great detail. 8. Apropos of the discussion above, the present Writ Petition is allowed with a direction to the respondents to consider the case of the petitioners and revise the pay scale of the petitioners from 01.01.2006, when the anomaly arose and grant them consequential benefits flowing therefrom; while keeping in mind the law as laid down by this Court in the relied-upon judgments. 9. Needful be done within a period of 4 months from the date of this order, failing which petitioners would also be entitled to interest @ 6%. 10. Pending application(s) if any also stand(s) disposed of. 09.07.2026 (NIDHI GUPTA) Divyanshi JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether reportable: Yes/No DIVYANSHI 2026.07.10 17:36 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document