121 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-20743-2026 Date of decision: 10.07.2026 Geetanjali ....Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARPREET SINGH BRAR Present: Mr. Padamkant Dwivedi, Advocate and Ms. Anshu Gupta, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Akshit Pathania, AAG, Haryana. HARPREET SINGH BRAR, J. (ORAL) 1. The present civil writ petition has been filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to grant the benefit of pay protection i.e. the salary being received by her on previous post of Sanskrit Teacher upon her appointment as Post Graduate Teacher, Economics through proper channel in accordance with the rules. Further, directing the respondents to grant the arrears of revised salary after protection of pay along with interest @ 18% per annum. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner inter alia contends that the case of the petitioner for pay protection was forwarded by respondent No.5 vide letter dated 08.07.2023 as discernible from Annexure P-17 but was repeatedly returned with objections by respondent No.2. Ultimately, respondent No.2 issued instructions on 17.11.2025 for processing pay protection cases, thereafter, respondent No.5 vide letter dated 15.05.2026 and the case of the NEHA 2026.07.13 11:14 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh CWP-20743-2026 -2- petitioner has been sent for pay protection in terms of the instructions dated 17.11.2025 issued by the Finance Department as discernible from Annexure P- 28. The petitioner served a legal notice on 20.04.2026 which remained unheeded. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that he would be satisfied if the legal notice (Annexure P-30) of the petitioner is decided by respondent No.2 in terms of the instructions dated 17.11.2025 (Annexure P-28) as well as in terms of the recommendations made by respondent No.5 by passing a speaking order in a time bound manner. 4. Learned State counsel, appearing on advanced notice, submits that he has no objection in case a direction is issued to respondent No.2 for time- bound consideration and decision of the legal notice of the petitioner by passing a speaking order. 5. Therefore, in view of the limited prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner, respondent No.2 is directed to consider and decide the legal notice (Annexure P-30) of the petitioner in terms of the instructions dated 17.11.2025 (Annexure P-28) as well as in terms of the recommendations made by respondent No.5 and pass a speaking order, after affording her an opportunity to be heard, within a period of 06 weeks from the date of receiving a certified copy of this order. Further, the decision taken thereof shall be conveyed to the petitioner. Needless to say, if the petitioner is found entitled to the relief sought, the same shall be granted forthwith by respondent No.2. In that event, the arrears shall be calculated and paid within a further period of three months, thereafter. NEHA 2026.07.13 11:14 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh CWP-20743-2026 -3- 6. Any deviation from the direction issued by this Court, entitles the petitioner to move an appropriate application under Article 215 of Cr.P.C. of the Constitution of India to initiate contempt of Court proceedings. 7. Disposed of, accordingly. (HARPREET SINGH BRAR) JUDGE 10.07.2026 Neha Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No NEHA 2026.07.13 11:14 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh