← Library
High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCOCP/1356/2016dismissed

Gurcharan Singh v. Surinder Pal Saini

2018-01-15Mr. Justice S.P. Bangarh2 pages

COCP 1356/2016

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH COCP 1356/2016 Date of decision:15.01.2018 Gurcharan Singh ..............Petitioner v.

Shri Surinder Pal Saini ..............Respondent Coram:

Hon'ble Mr.Justice Jaswant Singh Present:- Mr.MK Dogra,Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr.Manoj Bajaj,Addl.AG Punjab Jaswant Singh,J,(Oral).

Petitioner on attaining the age of superannuation has retired on 30.11.2012 as Foreman Special G-1 from Workshop Division,Ranjit Sagar Dam,Shahpur Kandi Township,Pathankot. Prior to that he alongwith others agitated before this Court for protection of special increments granted to them on account of meritorious work. The matter stands adjudicated upto Hon'ble Supreme Court in favour of employees like petitioner. In the instant contempt it was alleged that despite the matter having been laid to rest upto Apex Court in favour of petitioner and others, the respondents were not releasing due benefit to him. Notice of motion was issued whereupon short reply dated 20.2.2017 by way of affidavit of Gurcharan Singh Wassan,Chief Engineer was filed stating therein that in compliance of the order dated 16.7.2014 passed by Hon'ble Supreme Court in SLP(Civil) No.13027 of 2011, pay of the petitioner has been refixed allowing 4 special increments to him and Rajinder Parshad Joshi 2018.01.18 11:39 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

COCP 1356/2016 consequential dues released, as detailed in paras 5 and 6 of the reply. On 20.2.2017 counsel for the petitioner had sought time to file a counter to the reply to show that the petitioner was entitled to award of interest on the delayed payments of retiral benefits. On the next date again counsel for the petitioner sought time. Till date neither any counter has been filed nor at the time of hearing today learned counsel for the petitioner has been able to show that petitioner is entitled to award of interest on the delayed payments of retiral benefits.

In view of the above and contents of the reply filed by respondents, the instant contempt petition has become infructuous and no further action is warranted in the matter.

15.01.2018 (Jaswant Singh) joshi Judge Whether Speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No Rajinder Parshad Joshi 2018.01.18 11:39 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document