IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision: 06.04.2026 Tanish Bajaj and others ….Petitioners versus State of Punjab and others ….Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAMIT KUMAR Present: Mr. Kanwaljeet Singh, Advocate, for the petitioners.

Mr. Surya Kumar, AAG, Punjab.

NAMIT KUMAR , J. (ORAL)

1. Instant writ petition has been filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India for directing the respondents to grant statutory pay scale to the petitioner as mandated in the Punjab Educational (Teaching Cadre) Group-C Service Rules, 2018 and the Punjab Education (Teaching Cadre) Border Area Group ‘C’ Service Rules, 2018 viz. 10300-34800+Grade Pay Rs.4200/- from entry into service along with arrears and interest @ 12% in view of the decision of this Court dated 13.09.2024 (Annexure P-9) in CWP-15896 of 2023 – Saurabh Sharma and others v. State of Punjab and another, which has been upheld by a Division Bench of this Court vide order dated 10.12.2024 (Annexure P-10) and further upheld by the Hon’ble Supreme Court vide order dated 20.01.2025 (Annexure P-11) and also keeping in view order dated 14.10.2024 (Annexure P-8); for directing the respondents to take into account the statutory pay scale of Rs.10300- 34800+ Grade Pay Rs.4200 with further pay revisions; for quashing of instructions dated 21.10.2020 and 17.07.2020 (Annexures P-5 and P-6) and for holding that instructions dated 21.10.2020 and 17.07.2020 have no application in the recruitment of the petitioners.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that to claim the aforesaid benefit petitioners have moved representation dated 21.12.2025 (Annexure P-20), however, no action has been taken by the respondents thereon till date. Learned counsel for the petitioners confines his prayer for deciding representation dated 21.12.2025 (Annexure P-20) 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. Surya Kumar, AAG, 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.4 is directed to consider and decide the claim made by the petitioners in the representation dated 21.12.2025 (Annexure P-20)

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.

06.04.2026 (NAMIT KUMAR)

R.S. JUDGE

Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No

Whether Reportable: Yes/No