IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civl Writ Petition No.18165 of 2011 Date of Decision : September 27, 2011. Durga Devi and others .....Petitioners versus State of Punjab and another .....Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT. Present : Mr.Vikas Chatrath, Advocate, for the petitioners. Ms.Sudeepti Sharma, 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.Sudeepti Sharma, learned Deputy Advocate General, Punjab, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents. Let two copies of the writ petition be supplied to the learned State counsel during the course of day failing which the order shall be automatically recalled and the writ petition shall be deemed to have been dismissed for non-prosecution. In view of the nature of order which I propose to pass, there is no need to seek any counter reply from the respondents at this stage. CWP No.18165 of 2011 [2] The petitioners who are working/retired as Art & Craft/PTI/ Sewing Teachers in the Education Department, Government of Punjab, seek pay scales equivalent to that of Hindi/Punjabi Teachers (Language Teachers) on the basis of a judgment of this Court dated 7.5.2009 passed in a bunch of writ petitions including CWP No.16380 of 1989 (Balbir Singh and others versus State of Punjab and others) (Annexure P-6). During the course of hearing, learned counsel for the parties are ad-idem that the controversy involved in this case stands settled by the aforesaid decision in Balbir Singh and others' case (supra). The writ petition is accordingly disposed of in terms of the afore-stated decision of this Court in Balbir Singh and others' case (supra and the respondents are directed to consider the claim of the petitioners in the light of Balbir Singh's case (supra). In case the petitioners' claim is found covered under the aforesaid decision, the consequential benefits shall be given. However, if the respondents find that the claim of the petitioners is distinguishable, they shall dispose of it by passing a speaking order within a period of two months from the date of receiving a certified copy of this order. Dasti. September 27, 2011 (SURYA KANT) Mohinder JUDGE