IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No.626/2011 Date of Decision : 10.2.2011. Gopal Krishan and others ..........Petitioners v State of Punjab and others ..........Respondents. Coram: Hon'ble Mr.Justice Jaswant Singh Present: Mr. Vikas Chatrath,Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Puneet Gupta, Addl.A.G, Punjab for the respondents. Jaswant Singh,J (Oral) Petitioners, who are serving/retired Teachers/Masters of the Education Department of State of Punjab, seek a mandamus directing the respondents to permit them to re-exercise their option within some reasonable period for grant of revised pay scale w.e.f 1.1.1986 in terms of the Notification/Circular dated 24.12.1992 (P.1). This Court vide its judgment dated 25.2.2010 rendered in CWP No.7464 of 2009 titled Surender Kumar and another v. State of Punjab has, in a identical situation, decided the issue in favour of the similarly situated Teachers. It is, thus, submitted that the matter being squarely covered, the petitioners are entitled to similar relief. Upon notice, Sh. Puneet Gupta, Addl.A.G, Punjab has put in appearance and stated that in pursuance of the directions by this Court in Surender Kumar's case (supra), a general policy has been framed by the State of Punjab on 31.1.2011 and the matter is squarely covered under the said policy and the petitioner shall be granted the benefit in terms of the policy i.e from a prospective date. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that in the policy, the arrears of re-fixed emoluments and pension were granted w.e.f 1.3.2010 to the Teachers (petitioners) in Surender Kumar's case (supra) and, therefore, similar relief should be granted to the present petitioners. This court is unable to accept such a plea in view of the fact that a uniform generalized policy has now been framed and the petitioners are squarely covered in that policy like Surender Kumar's case (supra). Thereafter, the petitioners had approached this Court and the date of 1.3.2010 was chosen since the decision was rendered on 25.2.2010. In the present case, the petitioners have approached this Court on 13.1.2011 and before any order can be passed, the State has framed a generalized policy and, therefore, in my view, no deviation from the policy can be made. Accordingly, plea of the petitioners for grant of said relief w.e.f 1.3.2010 is rejected. It is held that the petitioners shall be granted the benefit in terms of the policy dated 31.1.2011. Disposed of in the above terms. February 10, 2011 ( JASWANT SINGH ) manoj JUDGE