High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCWP/17291/2016disposed of

Union Territory Chandigarh And Others v. Central Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh And Others

2016-11-10Mr. Justice Surinder Gupta,Mrs Justice Daya Chaudhary2 pages

CWP-17291-2016 -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-17291-2016 Date of decision: 10.11.2016 U.T. Chandigarh and others ..... Petitioners

Versus

Central Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench, Chandigarh and another ..... Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMENDRA JAIN PRESENT: Mr. Vikas Bali, Advocate for the petitioners. AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. (ORAL) 1.

The petitioners have approached this Court under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, inter alia for issuance of a writ in the nature of Certiorari for setting aside the order dated 13.01.2016 (Annexure P-9) passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh (for short 'the CAT') in OA No. 060/00623 of 2015. 2.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that an affidavit of Sh. Ajit Balaji, Deputy Commissioner-cum-Estate Officer, U.T. Chandigarh has been filed in CWP-22691-2016 stating therein that respondent No. 2 herein was entitled for the following amounts:- Heads under which the payments have been made Date of release/sanction of payments Amount (in rupees) Interest on DCRG, Pension and Commutation 28.10.2016 2,57,286/- DCRG/Gratuity 27.10.2016 9,16,740/- Rishu Kataria 2016.12.05 11:01 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

CWP-17291-2016 -2Pension and others Arrears 02.11.2016 8,20,665/- Leave Encashment 02.02.2014 5,55,600/- GIS 30.08.2014 49,982/- GPF 28.10.2014 19,47,597/- 3.

A photocopy of the said affidavit has been produced by learned counsel for the petitioners in Court today, which is taken on record. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that in terms of the said calculations and directions of the CAT which have been impugned herein, the entire payment along with interest stands paid to respondent No. 2. 4.

In view thereof, it was submitted that the instant petition has been rendered infructuous.

Accordingly, the present petition is disposed of as having been rendered infructuous.

( AJAY KUMAR MITTAL ) JUDGE November 10, 2016 ( RAMENDRA JAIN ) rishu JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No Rishu Kataria 2016.12.05 11:01 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document