High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCOCP/3212/2017disposed of

Dev Parkash v. Krishan Kumar Khandelwal Acs, School Education, Haryan And Others

2017-11-03Mr. Justice Dr. Bharat Bhushan Parsoon2 pages

COCP No. 3212 of 2017

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH COCP No. 3212 of 2017 Date of decision : 03.11.2017 Dev Parkash ....Petitioner V/s Krishan Kumar Khandelwal & ors.

....Respondents BEFORE : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJAN GUPTA

Present:

Mr. Ramesh Malik, Advocate for the petitioner. RAJAN GUPTA J.

Notice of motion.

On the asking of court, Mr. Gaurav Jindal, Addl. A.G. Haryana, who is present in court, accepts notice.

Petitioner alleges violation of order dated 01.08.2016 passed by writ court, operative part thereof reads as under:- "This was subject to the condition laid down in the said instructions. Of course, if the conditions are laid down, the petitioner has to follow these conditions. However, the past service, rendered in the Government Aided School against the sanctioned post, is to be counted for the grant of pension and gratuity. The petitioner worked on the sanctioned post of Hindi teacher in the Government Aided School from 6.8.1984 to 19.11.1993. The said period is to be counted as qualifying service for the purpose of grant of pension and gratuity. The present writ petition is allowed on the abovenoted terms. The respondents are directed to fix the revised pension after counting his said service and pay the same within three months from the date of passing of this order with interest at the rate of 9% per annum, starting three months from the date of Ajay Kumar 2017.11.04 12:46 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document retirement till payment."

COCP No. 3212 of 2017 At the outset learned State counsel submits that in case no appeal is pending against the aforesaid order, same shall be complied with at the earliest, in any case not later than two months. In view of statement made by learned State counsel, no further direction is necessary. Disposed of. It is however, clarified that in the eventuality a fresh cause of action accrues to the petitioner to invoke the contempt jurisdiction of this court, apart from initiating proceedings under the Act, it shall also impose exemplary costs which shall be deducted from the salary of the official(s) responsible for delay/non-compliance. November 03, 2017 (RAJAN GUPTA) Ajay JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether reportable:

Yes/No Ajay Kumar 2017.11.04 12:46 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document