IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.21242 of 2010 Date of Decision: November 30, 2010 Jagjinder Singh & others .....PETITIONER(S) VERSUS State of Punjab and others .....RESPONDENT(S) . . . CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA PRESENT: - Mr. P.K. Goklaney, Advocate, for the petitioners. . . . AJAI LAMBA, J (Oral) 1. This civil writ petition has been filed under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to grant revised pay scale recommended by various Pay Commissions in regard to skilled and semi skilled staff in service of Punjab Government. 2. Notice of motion. 3. On the asking of the Court, Mr. B.S. Chahal, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab, accepts notice on behalf of respondents. Requisite number of copies of the petition have CWP No.21242 of 2010 [2] been given to learned counsel for the respondents. 4. On request of learned counsel for the parties and in view of peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, the matter is taken up for final adjudication today itself. 5. It has been pleaded on behalf of the petitioners that persons similar to the petitioners approached this Court by way of filing Civil Writ Petition No.10759 of 1990 titled ‘Rajinder Paul Gautam & others vs. State of Punjab & others’. The said petition has been allowed vide Judgment dated 30.5.2008 and relief as prayed for by the petitioners has been granted. 6. The respondent-State filed LPA No.44 of 2009 titled ‘State of Punjab & others vs. Rajinder Paul Gautam & others’ which has been dismissed vide Judgment dated 15.2.2010. It has further been brought out that respondent-State went up in SLP before the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India which has also been dismissed vide Judgment dated 12.7.2010 (SLP Nos.14994, 14995 & 15225 of 2010). In this view of the matter, the petitioners are also entitled to the same pay scale as held permissible in the judgments delivered by this Court. 7. The legal position is not CWP No.21242 of 2010 [3] controverted by the respondent-State. 8. In view of the above, the petition is allowed in terms of Judgment dated 15.2.2010 rendered in LPA No.44 of 2009 titled ‘State of Punjab & others vs. Rajinder Paul Gautam & others’. (AJAI LAMBA) November 30, 2010 JUDGE avin 1. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?