IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.20280 of 2006 Date of Decision: December 16, 2009 Narinder Kumar & Others .....PETITIONER(S) VERSUS State of Punjab & Others .....RESPONDENT(S) . . . CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA PRESENT: - Mr. Kapil Kakkar, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr. B.S. Chahal, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab, for the respondents. . . . AJAI LAMBA, J (Oral) This petition has been filed under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari, quashing clause 16 of letter of appointment dated 4.12.2006 (Annexure P-4). It has been contended that the petitioners joined Punjab Education Department as Masters/ Mistresses on various dates. While the petitioners were serving on pensionable posts, an advertisement was issued for appointment of 1314 CWP No.20280 of 2006 [2] School Teachers which included 651 Lecturers. The petitioners being eligible for appointment as Lecturers, applied in response to the advertisement and were selected. Appointment letter in the form of Annexure P-4 has been issued. Clause/ Condition No.16 thereof reads as under:- “16. He/she will not be entitled to any benefit, whatsoever, under the existing pension/ family pension scheme. The provisions of new contributory pension scheme to be notified by the Govt. shall be applicable to him/ her.” Learned counsel contends that the petitioners are aggrieved by the above clause as it is oppressive as against the petitioners. Learned counsel contends that the respondents considering the issue, have already issued Instructions dated 24.10.2008 (Annexure A-1). The case of the petitioners is covered by these Instructions, and therefore, their case needs to be decided accordingly. Learned counsel for the respondents states that indeed the case of the petitioners needs to be considered in the context of Instructions dated 24.10.2008 (Annexure A-1). In view of the above, the petition is disposed of with directions to the respondents to consider the case of the petitioners in the CWP No.20280 of 2006 [3] context of Instructions dated 24.10.2008 (Annexure A-1) and pass order as warranted by facts and in accordance with law, within a period of four months of receipt of a certified copy of the order. (AJAI LAMBA) December 16, 2009 JUDGE avin 1. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?