IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP. No. 6900 of 2010 Date of Decision: 20.4.2010. Darshan Singh --Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and others --Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE PERMOD KOHLI. Present:- Mr. R.N. Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner. *** PERMOD KOHLI.J (ORAL) Notice of motion. Mr. R.K.S. Brar, Addl. A.G., Haryana has been asked to accept notice on behalf of respondents-State. Keeping in view the nature of relief claimed and with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, this petition is being disposed of at the motion stage itself. The petitioner was appointed as Lab. Attendant in Haryana War Heroes' Memorial College, Gohana which was later taken over by the Govt. in the year 1981. At the time of his recruitment petitioner was Middle pass and the post of Lab. Attendant was a Class-IV post. In the year 1986 the pay scales for Middle pass Lab. Attendants and Matriculate Lab. Attendants were fixed differently. The Middle pass Lab. Attendants were placed in the pay scale of Rs. 350-500/-, whereas the Matriculate Lab. Attendants were placed in the pay scale of Rs. 400-600/-. After the pay revision w.e.f. 1.1.1996 the pay scale of Middle pass Lab. Attendants were revised to Rs. 775-1025 and those of Matriculate Lab Attendants pay scale was revised to Rs. 950-1500/-. On account of this discrepancy a number of writ petitions CWP. No. 6900 of 2010 -2- came to be filed before this Court. One of the writ petition being CWP No. 3901 of 1988 was decided vide judgement dated 29.7.2008, whereby it was directed that both the categories of Lab. Attendants be placed in the same pay scales. The petitioner's grievance is that he is not being given the similar benefit as has been given to other Middle pass Lab. Attendants. The petitioner has served a legal notice (Annexure P-5) in this regard, which is still pending. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner would be satisfied, if, respondents are directed to take decision on the legal notice served by the petitioner, referred to above. In view of the above, this petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent no.2 to decide the legal notice served by the petitioner in the light of the judgement dated 29.7.2008 passed in CWP No. 3901 of 1988 within a period of three months from the date certified copy of this order is served upon the said respondent. Needless to say that in the event the claim of the petitioner is to be rejected, the same shall be by a reasoned and speaking order. (PERMOD KOHLI) JUDGE 20.4.2010. lucky