High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCWP/22376/2016disposed of

Som Nath v. State Of Punjab And ORS

2019-08-27Mr. Justice Harsimran Singh Sethi2 pages

CWP-22376-2016 (O&M) -1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CWP-22376-2016 (O&M) Date of decision: - 27.08.2019 Som Nath ....Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab and others .....Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI Present: - Mr. Sandeep Bansal, Advocate for the petitioner.

Ms. Sunint Kaur, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab. Mr. Deepak Kundu, Advocate for Mr. Piyush Khanna, Advocate for respondent No.4-PSPCL.

Mr. Puneet Pali, Advocate for Mr. R.K. Jindal, Advocate for respondent No.5.

*** HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI , J. (ORAL) Counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No.4 states that the prayer of the petitioner for counting of work charge service which he rendered prior to the regularization of his service i.e. from 01.11.1978 to 31.10.1989, has already been accepted and even the retiral benefits have been revised and only the payments are yet to be released to the petitioner.

NARESH KUMAR 2019.09.04 13:17 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

CWP-22376-2016 (O&M) -2Counsel for the petitioner states that the respondents be time bound for releasing the payments in respect of the revised pensionary benefits. Counsel further states that as the payments have been made after a period of six years of the retirement, petitioner be given opportunity to approach the respondents to claim the interest on the said delayed payments keeping in view the settled principle of law. Counsel for respondent No.4 states all the consequential benefits in terms of revised of the PPOs, issued by the competent authority on 13.08.2019, will be made within a period of one month from today.

Counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No.4 further states that in case any representation is received from the petitioner claiming the interest, the same will be examined in the light of settled principle of law and appropriate order will be passed within a period of three months from the date of receipt of the same. Counsel for the petitioner states that keeping in view the statement given on behalf of respondent No.4, he does not want to press the present writ petition any further and the same may be disposed of as having not pressed.

Ordered accordingly.

( HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI ) August 27, 2019 JUDGE naresh.k Whether reasoned/speaking?

Yes Whether reportable?

No NARESH KUMAR 2019.09.04 13:17 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh