← Library
High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCWP/17264/2017disposed of

Sukhbir Singh v. State Of Haryana & Others

2019-04-04Mr. Justice Harsimran Singh Sethi2 pages

CWP-17264-2017 -1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CWP-17264-2017 Date of decision: - 04.04.2019 Sukhbir Singh ....Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana and others ....Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI Present:- Mr. Subhash Rana, Advocate for Mr. Manoj Sharma, Advocate, for the petitioner.

Mr. Charanjit Singh Bakhshi, Addl. A.G., Haryana. Mr. Sumit Jain, Advocate for Mr. Keshav Gupta, Advocate for respondents No.2 and 3.

*** HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI , J. (ORAL) In the present writ petition, the grievance of the petitioner is that due to a charge-sheet dated 24.10.2007, his pensionary benefits were withheld despite the fact that he has already superannuated on 31.07.2016.

Counsel for respondents No.2 and 3 states that the above-said charge-sheet issued to the petitioner has been dropped on 07.02.2019 and even the pensionary benefits of the petitioners have already been released to him vide order dated 14.03.2019.

Counsel for the petitioner states that the pensionary benefits have been released in March, 2019, whereas the petitioner retired from

CWP-17264-2017 -2service in July, 2016 and therefore, as the charge-sheet has been dropped, the petitioner is entitled for the interest on the delayed payments. Counsel for the petitioner further states that petitioner be given a liberty to approach the respondents in this regard by filing an appropriate representation keeping in view the settled principle of law settled a Full Bench of this Court in A.S. Randhawa Vs. State of Punjab and others, 1997(3) SCT 468.

Counsel for respondents No.2 and 3 states that in case any representation claiming the interest is filed by the petitioner, the same will be decided expeditiously, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order, by passing the appropriate orders as per the settled principle of law noticed above. Counsel for the petitioner states that keeping in view the above, no further orders are required to be passed in the present writ petition and the same may be disposed of, as not pressed at this stage. Ordered accordingly.

( HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI ) April 04, 2019 JUDGE naresh.k Whether reasoned/speaking?

Yes Whether reportable?

No