CWP No. 16790 of 2000 1 In the High Court for the States of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh … CWP No. 16790 of 2000 Date of decision: January 11,2010 The Haryana Confed Employees Welfare Union (Regd.) ..Petitioner. Versus The State of Haryana and others ..Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr.Justice Rajan Gupta Present: Mr. R.K.Malik, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Ashish Chaudhary, Advocate for the Petitioner. Mr. Kulvir Narwal, Addl.A.G.Haryana for respondent Nos.1 and 2 Mr. J.S.Cooner, Advocate for the respondent No.3 ... Rajan Gupta,J.(Oral) This judgment will dispose of CWP No. 16790 of 2000 and CWP No.15961 of 2000 as similar question of law is involved in both the writ petitions. The only prayer made in the instant petition preferred by The Haryana Confed Employees Welfare Union (Regd.) is for the issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus to grant the revised pay scale to all Salesmen in the same manner as other similarly placed Salesmen in the service of The Haryana State Federation of Consumer's Cooperative Wholesales Stores Ltd. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that during the pendency of this writ petition, a similar matter C.A. No. 9244 of 2003 titled CWP No. 16790 of 2000 2 as Haryana State Minor Irrigation Tubewell Corporation and others Versus G.S.Uppal and others came up before the Apex Court, which was decided on 16.4.2008. According to him, members of the petitioner-Union are entitled to relief in the same terms. Learned counsel for the respondent-Federation submits that a communication was sent to the State Government vide letter dated 18.1.2000(Annexure P-8) followed by similar letters dated 1.3.2000 and 7.8.2000(Annexures P-9 and P-10 respectively), but no response was received from the State Government. Mr. Kulvir Narwal, Addl. A.G. Haryana, appearing on behalf of the State of Haryana submits that the case of the petitioner shall be considered by the concerned authority in the light of the judgment referred to by the counsel for the petitioner and a speaking order thereon shall be passed within three months. In view of the statement made by learned State counsel, no further orders are called for at this stage. Disposed of. However, it is made clear that in case still aggrieved, it will be open to the petitioner to avail the remedy available to it under the law. January 11,2010 (RAJAN GUPTA) nk JUDGE