JUDGMENT Harsimran Singh Sethi, J. (Oral) - Counsel for the petitioner argues that the petitioner was entitled for the grant of higher standard scale of Rs.2000-3200 w.e.f. 01.01.1986 instead of 01.01.1992 and also for second higher standard scale of Rs.2000-3500 w.e.f. 01.01.1994 and the Executive Engineer has already forwarded the case to the Superintending Engineer for consideration and despite the fact that a sufficient period has elapsed but no action has been taken by the respondents in that regard. 2. Counsel for the petitioner very fairly admits that the petitioner retired from service in the year 2004 whereas representation for the higher standard pay scale was filed by the petitioner in March 2019 i.e. after a period of 15 years. No justification has been given as to why the petitioner waited for 15 years to approach this Court for the grant of relief. 3. As the case of the petitioner is already under consideration, which is clear from Annexure P-5 i.e. letter written by the Executive Engineer to the Superintending Engineer for taking appropriate decision, counsel for the petitioner prays that let a direction be issued to the Superintending Engineer i.e. respondent No.4 to take an appropriate decision on the recommendation made by the Executive Engineer vide letter dated 15.04.2019 (Annexure P-5) in a time bound manner. 4. Without commenting upon the merits of the case or about the entitlement of the petitioner for the relief which has been claimed by him in the present writ petition or in legal notice dated 15.04.2019 (Annexure P-5), the present writ petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No.4 to take appropriate decision on the recommendation dated 15.04.2019 (Annexure P-5) within a period of three months from the receipt of certified copy of this order. 5. Counsel for the petitioner has fairly admitted that he will not claim the arrears prior to the date of filing of his representation, i.e. March, 2019, if petitioner is found entitled for the benefit as being claimed by him.