Gurmail Singh v. Punjab State Transmission Corporation Limited And Others

CWP No.3902 of 2021 (O&M)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CWP No.3902 of 2021 (O&M) Date of decision: 24.07.2024 Gurmail Singh ....Petitioner

Versus

Punjab State Transmission Corporation Limited and others ....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAMIT KUMAR

Present:

Mr. S.K. Singla, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Abhishek Singla, Advocate for Mr. Vikas Chatrath, Advocate for respondent No.1.

Ms. Aashna Gill, Advocate for respondents No.2 to 5.

NAMIT KUMAR J. (Oral) The petitioner, who is a dismissed employee, has approached this Court, seeking a writ of certiorari for quashing the impugned action of the respondents along with letter/communication dated 25.01.2018 (Annexure P-12) whereby the claim of the petitioner for release of arrears of retiral dues/benefits i.e. GPF, Leave Encashment, etc. has been rejected. Further a writ of mandamus has been sought for directing the respondents to release the retiral dues/benefits i.e. GPF, Leave Encashment, etc. to the petitioner. MOHD YAKUB 2024.07.25 18:21 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Punjab & Haryana High Court at Chandigarh

CWP No.3902 of 2021 (O&M) Learned counsel for respondents No.2 to 5, on instructions from Sh.Parminder Singh Toor, Division Superintendent, PSPCL, Amloh, submits that the GPF amount could not be released to the petitioner as he has not submitted the application for releasing the same. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner shall submit the application for release of the GPF amount within a period of 04 weeks from today.

Accordingly, it is directed that in case any such application is submitted by the petitioner for release of the GPF amount, the same shall be duly considered and GPF amount be released to him, within a period of 02 months thereafter.

So far as the claim of the petitioner with regard to the benefit of leave encashment is concerned, this Court in CWP No.21318 of 2019, titled as "Rajesh Bhalla vs State of Punjab and others", decided on 09.01.2024, "Ram Kumar Ranga vs State of Haryana and others", 2019(4) SCT 99 and "Balwinder Singh and another vs State of Punjab and others", 2020(2) SCT 437, has held that an employee, who has been dismissed from service, is not entitled for leave encashment.

In view of the above, the instant petition is disposed of in the above terms.

(NAMIT KUMAR) 24.07.2024 JUDGE yakub Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether reportable:

Yes/No MOHD YAKUB 2024.07.25 18:21 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Punjab & Haryana High Court at Chandigarh