IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.2696 of 2010 Date of Decision : February 16, 2010. Tarlok Singh and others .....Petitioners versus State of Punjab and others .....Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT. Present : Mr.G.S.Bal, Advocate, for the petitioners. Ms.Charu Tuli, Sr.DAG, Punjab. -.- 1. Whether Reporters of Local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? --- Surya Kant, J. (Oral) Notice of motion. Ms.Charu Tuli, learned Senior Deputy Advocate General, Punjab accepts notice on behalf of the respondents. In view of the nature of the order which I propose to pass, there is no necessity to seek any counter-reply from the respondents at this stage. The petitioners are retired Masters/Teachers from the Education Department, Punjab. They seek a mandamus to direct the respondents to count the service rendered by them in Government Aided Privately Managed Schools, towards their pensionary benefits and accordingly grant them the revised pension alongwith interest. The afore-stated claim made by the petitioners is based upon C.W.P.No .2696 of 2010 2 two counts. Firstly, it is urged that similar benefit has already been granted by this Court to various Masters/Teachers on the strength of the judgment in State of Punjab and others versus Dev Dutt Kaushal and others, 1995 Suppl.(4) SCC 748. Secondly, the respondents themselves have granted such benefits to the similarly situated Teachers/Masters vide orders dated 23.6.2009 and 28.10.2009 (Annexures P-8 & P-9 respectively) passed by the D.P.I. (Secondary Education), Punjab. The petitioners, however, have not been granted such benefits despite the legal notice dated 1.11.2009 (Annexure P-7) served on their behalf. Having heard learned counsel for the parties at some length and considering the nature of relief sought in the writ petition, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the same with a direction to respondent No.2 to consider the claim of the petitioners on the analogy of orders dated 23.6.2009 (Annexure P-8) and 28.10.2009 (Annexure P-9) whereby similar benefits are said to have been granted to S/Sh.Surjit Lal and Kewal Krishal etc. as well as to Saristi Pal, Balwinder Singh etc. Respondent No.2 shall pass appropriate orders in case of all the petitioners as early as possible, preferably within a period of four months from the date of receiving a certified copy of this order. Ordered accordingly. Dasti. 16-02-2010 (SURYA KANT) Mohinder JUDGE