IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision: 13.02.2026 Surjit Kaur and others ......Petitioners Versus State of Punjab and others ......Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAMIT KUMAR Present: - Mr. Karan Nehra, Advocate, and Mr. Manvinder Thakur, Advocate, for the petitioners.

Mr. Satnampreet Singh Chauhan, DAG, Punjab.

NAMIT KUMAR, J. (ORAL)

1. Instant petition has been filed by the petitioners under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the official respondents to revise the pension/family pension of the petitioners at par/on the same pattern of the other pre-2016 retirees of the respondent as per the revised pension notification dated 29.10.2021 (Annexure P-8) from the date of entitlement of the petitioners along with granting the benefit of the additional pension/family pension in terms of Clause 6 of the notification dated 29.10.2021 on account of the fact that the petitioners along with other pre-2016 retirees in Group III and IV posts in various Zila Parishads and Panchayat Samitis constitute a homogenous class and pay all arrears along with 18% interest and for directing the official respondents to release pensionary benefits DA/DR, family pension other retiral benefits and all other consequential benefits as per the Sixth Punjab Pay Commission especially in line with notification dated 29.10.2021 (Annexure P-8), notification dated 18.02.2025 (Annexure P-9) and letter dated 12.05.2025 (Annexure P-10) along with all arrears @ 18% interest.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that to claim the aforesaid benefit petitioners have filed representation dated 17.07.2025 (Annexure P-11) before the respondents, however, no action has been taken therein till date. Learned counsel for the petitioners confines his prayer for deciding representation dated 17.07.2025 (Annexure P-11) and submits that at this stage, petitioners would be satisfied, if the said representation is considered and decided by passing a speaking order in a time-bound frame.

3. Notice of motion.

4. Mr. Satnampreet Singh, DAG, Punjab, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents and has no objection to the innocuous prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioners.

5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record of the case.

6. Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case or the claim being made by the petitioners in the present petition, respondent No.1 is directed to consider and decide the claim made by the petitioners in the representation dated 17.07.2025 (Annexure P-11)

in accordance with law, by passing a speaking order within a period of three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.

7. The petition stands disposed of.

(NAMIT KUMAR)

13.02.2026 JUDGE R.S.

Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether Reportable : Yes/No