IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civl Writ Petition No.8427 of 2011 Date of Decision : May 12, 2011. Neelam Kumari and others .....Petitioners versus State of Punjab and others .....Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT. Present : Mr.Sunny Singla, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr.J.S.Puri, Additional Advocate General, 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. Mr.J.S.Puri, Additional Advocate General, Punjab, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents. 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. The petitioners are serving/retired Lecturers/Teachers/Masters/ Mistresses of the Education Department, Government of Punjab. They seek a mandamus to direct the respondents to permit them to re-exercise their option within some reasonable period for the grant of revised pay-scales w.e.f. 1.1.1986 in terms of the notification/Circular dated 24.12.1992 (Annexure P2). CWP No.8427 of 2011 [2] During the course of hearing, learned counsel for the parties are ad-idem that the controversy involved in this case stands settled by a decision dated 25.2.2010 rendered by this Court in Civil Writ Petition No.7464 of 2009 (Surinder Kumar and others versus State of Punjab and others) (Annexure P-5) vide which the similarly situated petitioners have been given the desired relief. The writ petition is accordingly allowed in terms of the afore- stated decision of this Court in Surinder Kumar and others' case (supra). Dasti. May 12, 2011 (SURYA KANT) Mohinder JUDGE