← Library
High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCWP/24367/2017disposed of

Subhash Rani v. State Of Punjab And ORS.

2017-10-27Mr. Justice Rajan Gupta2 pages

CWP No. 24367 OF 2017 --1--

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CWP No. 24367 OF 2017 DECIDED ON: OCTOBER 27, 2017 SUBHASH RANI .....PETITIONER

VERSUS

STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS .....RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASPAL SINGH

Present:

Mr. M.K. Dogra, Advocate for the petitioner.

***** JASPAL SINGH, J (ORAL) By virtue of instant petition preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, petitioner has sought issuance of a writ, order or direction especially in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to immediately pay the service benefits on account of death of her late husband during service, including family pension (regular), gratuity, leave encashment etc. and other dues as are still outstanding viz. balance amount of GPF, arrears of dues on account of restoration of special increments along with interest @ 18% per annum.

2.

At the very outset of the arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner feels satisfied in case direction is issued to respondent(s) to decide latest representation dated 20.08.2017 (Annexure P-3), within a stipulated period.

Sonika 2017.10.30 16:53 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

CWP No. 24367 OF 2017 --2-- 3.

Instant petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent(s) to consider the grouses ventilated the petitioner in her representation dated 20.08.2017 (Annexure P-3), and take conscious decision, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. In case, the concerned authority comes to the conclusion that petitioner is entitled to the benefit claimed, to release the same within a period of next one month. 4.

The matter with regard to grant of interest on delayed payment shall also be considered in view of the observations made by Full Bench of this Court in case captioned as "R.S. Randhawa v. State of Punjab", 1997 (3) RSJ 318.

5.

However, if the petitioner still feels aggrieved against the order passed by the concerned authority, she shall be at liberty to approach this Court. OCTOBER 27, 2017 (JASPAL SINGH) sonika JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes Whether reportable Yes/No Sonika 2017.10.30 16:53 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh