Allowed

Navneet Josan and Others v. State of Punjab and Others

Punjab & Haryana HC11 Sept 2026CWP/29466/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order granted a writ of mandamus to the respondent authorities to decide a legal notice dated 20.08.2026 filed by the petitioners regarding their statutory pay scale, pay revision, arrears, and interest, citing Saurabh Sharma.

What did the court decide?

Granted a mandamus to decide the legal notice within six weeks and liberty to revive the petition if not decided.

Navneet Josan and Others Vs State… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Punjab & Haryana HC (2026)

¶1

CWP-29466-2026 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

(115) CWP-29466-2026 Date of Decision : 11.09.2026

¶3

Navneet Jo s an and others

¶4

...Petitioners

¶5

Vers u s

¶6

State of Pu n jab and others ...Respondents

¶7

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP TIWARI

¶8

Present: Mr. Arjun Shukla, Ms. Shelly A rora, Mr. Rishab Dhiman, Ms. Vanshika Grover, Mr. Ab h imanyu Kaushal, and Mr. Charanjiv Singh Rana, Ad v ocates for the petitioners.

¶9

Mr. Sahil R. Bakshi, AAG, Pu n jab.

¶10

¶11

KULDEEP TIWARI , J.(ORAL)

¶12

Through the instant writ petiti o n, prayer is made for issuance o f a mandamus , upon the respondents, to gran t the petitioners the statutory p ay scale of Rs.10300-34800 + Rs.4200/-5,000 / - (Grade Pay), as mandated by t he Revised Pa y Scales Rules, 2019, with furth e r pay revision, arrears and inte r est @ 12% thereon, in light of the decision dated 13.09.2024, rendered in CWP-15896-2023 (Saurabh Sharma and others Vs. State of Punjab and another).

¶13

Learned counsel for the petit i oners submits that the petitio n ers served a legal notice dated 20.08.20 2 6 (Annexure P-10), upon t he respondent s . However, owing to a lackada i sical and indolent approach of t he authorities c oncerned, the said legal notice has not been decided, as on d a te, MANPREET SINGH 2026.09.12 11:13 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment

¶14

CWP-29466-2026 2

¶15

which prop e lled them to file the instant wri t petition, seeking mandamus, u p on the respond e nts concerned, to take apt steps.

¶16

Notice of motion.

¶17

Mr. Sahil R. Bakshi, AAG, P u njab, accepts notice on behal f of the respond e nts No.1 to 5/State, and waive s services. He fairly submits that he has no ob j ection, in case, a mandamu s is passed upon the authori t ies concerned, t o decide the legal notice (supra ) .

¶18

In view of the above, since a b ona fide and innocuous prayer h as been made b y the petitioners, this Court de e ms it fit and appropriate to pa s s a mandamus u pon the competent respondent a mongst the respondents, to dec i de the legal n o tice dated 20.08.2026 (Annex u re P-10), in view of the ratio laid down in the case of Saurabh Sharma (supra), after providing due opportu n ity of hearing t o the petitioners.

¶19

The exercise (supra), shall be carried out within a period of six weeks, fro m the date of receipt of certified c opy of this order.

¶20

7. Disposed of accordingly.

¶21

Copy of this order be conveye d to the respondents, forthwith, f or

¶22

its complia n ce.

¶23

In case, legal notice (supra), i s not decided within the stipulat e d period, the p etitioners are at liberty to get t h e instant writ petition revived b y moving an a pt application.

¶24

(KULDEEP TIWARI) JUDGE September 1 1, 2026 Manpreet Whether speaking/reaso n ed : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No

¶25

MANPREET SINGH 2026.09.12 11:13 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment

Navneet Josan and Others v. State of Punjab and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Navneet Josan and Others v. State of Punjab and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases