High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCWP/21879/2018disposed of

Gursimran Preet Kaur And ANR. v. State Of Punjab And Others

2018-09-17Mr. Justice Rameshwar Singh Malik2 pages

CWP No.21879 OF 2018 --1--

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CWP No.21879 OF 2018 DECIDED ON: SEPTEMBER 17, 2018 GURSIMRAN PREET KAUR AND ANR.

.....PETITIONERS

VERSUS

STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS.

.....RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASPAL SINGH

Present:

Mr. Inderjit Sharma, Advocate, for the petitioner.

***** JASPAL SINGH, J.

Through instant civil writ petition, preferred under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India, petitioners have sought issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to release the family pension to the petitioners (minor children) as their mother also died who was earlier getting family pension and arrears of pension along with interest. 2.

The contention of learned counsel for the petitioners is that after the demise of Sewa Singh, who served the Education Department, Punjab, the case was initiated for the grant of family pension to his children namely Gursimran Preet Kaur and Gurmantar Preet Singh. The matter was recommended and forwarded by the District Education Officer (Secondary Education), Pathankot vide letter dated 26.09.2017 (P-3) but no conscious decision has been taken. Subsequent thereto, the petitioner also moved another representation dated SONIKA 2018.09.21 14:27 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

CWP No.21879 OF 2018 --2-- 05.02.2018 (P-4) seeking grant of family pension of deceased Sewa Singh but no final decision has been taken thereof so far. 3.

At this juncture, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners feel satisfied in case direction is issued to respondents to decide representation (P-4), in a time bound manner. 4.

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, instant petition is disposed of with a direction to respondents to look into the grievances unfolded by the petitioners in representation (P-4) and to take a conscious decision by passing a speaking order, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. 5.

However, if petitioners still feel aggrieved by any of the orders passed by the concerned authority, they shall be at liberty to approach this Court or to have recourse to the other remedies available under law. SEPTEMBER 17, 2018 (JASPAL SINGH) sonika JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes Whether reportable Yes/No SONIKA 2018.09.21 14:27 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh