1 CWP-19889 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-19889 of 2026 Date of decision: 14.07.2026 Narinder Kaushal ….Petitioner versus State of Punjab and others ….Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAMIT KUMAR Present: Mr. Harlove Singh Rajput, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Rohit Ahuja, DAG, Punjab. Mr. Vikas Singh, Sr. Advocate, with Ms. Anamika Sheoran, Advocate, for respondent No.2. Mr. Rajesh Hooda, Advocate, for respondent No.3. NAMIT KUMAR , J. (ORAL) 1. Instant petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for quashing the order/letter dated 17.06.2025 (Annexure P-5) and order/letter dated 08.07.2025 (Annexure P-7), passed by respondent No.3, whereby request/claim of the petitioner seeking enhanced pension/revision of higher pension has been denied with a further prayer seeking directions to the respondents to consider the claim of the petitioner for enhanced pension/revision of higher pension in lieu of circular/instructions dated 29.12.2022 (Annexure P- 1), passed by respondent No.3. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the case of the petitioner is squarely covered by the judgment of this Court dated RAVINDER SINGH 2026.07.14 17:39 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment 2 CWP-19889 of 2026 09.10.2025 passed in CWP-29633 of 2025 – Hazara Masih v. The Employees Provident Fund Organization and others as well as the judgment dated 23.01.2026 rendered in CWP-1696 of 2026 – Hari Om and others v. Union of India and others; judgment dated 21.04.2026 rendered in CWP-7181 of 2026 – Lakhwinder Masih and others v. The Employees Provident Fund Organization and others and judgment dated 25.05.2026 rendered in CWP-16475 of 2026 – Harmeet Kaur v. Union of India and others. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that for redressal of his grievances, the petitioner has also moved a representation dated 21.08.2025 (Annexure P-8) to the respondents which is still pending consideration. He further submits that at this stage, the petitioner would be satisfied, if appropriate directions are issued to the respondents to consider and decide the said representation in the light of the aforesaid judgments, by passing a speaking order, in a time bound manner. 3. Notice of motion. 4. Mr. Rohit Ahuja, DAG, Punjab, accepts notice on behalf of respondent No.1-State, Ms. Anamika Sheoran, Advocate, accepts notice on behalf of respondent No.2 and Mr. Rajesh Hooda, Advocate, accepts notice on behalf of respondent No.3 and they have no objection to the innocuous prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record of the case. RAVINDER SINGH 2026.07.14 17:39 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment 3 CWP-19889 of 2026 6. Without going into the merits of the case at this stage, the present petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No.3 to consider and decide representation dated 21.08.2025 (Annexure P-8) submitted by the petitioner expeditiously in view of the aforesaid judgments, by passing a speaking order after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, preferably within a period of three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. Further, the decision taken thereon shall be conveyed to the petitioner. 14.07.2026 (NAMIT KUMAR) R.S. JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether Reportable: Yes/No RAVINDER SINGH 2026.07.14 17:39 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment