High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCWP/7619/2016disposed of

Yash Pal & ORS v. State Of Punjab & ORS

2016-05-20Mr. Justice A.B. Chaudhari2 pages

CWP No. 7619 of 2016

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CWP No. 7619 of 2016 Date of decision: 20.05.2016 Yash Pal and others ....Petitioner(s)

Versus

State of Punjab and others

...Respondent(s)

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SANDHAWALIA

Present:

Mr. Arvind Kashyap, Advocate, for the petitioners.

G.S.SANDHAWALIA, J. (Oral) The petitioners seek the allotment of General Provident Fund account under the GPF scheme as it existed prior to 01.01.2004. It is the case of the petitioners that the petitioners were appointed as daily wagers between the period 1984 to 1996. However, their services were regularized between 2005 to 2011 and on account of the defined contributory pension scheme coming into effect from 01.01.2004, they are not being allotted the GPF account number. The relief is claimed on the basis of the Division Bench judgment of this Court in Harbans Lal vs. State of Punjab and others, 2012 (3) SCT 362 (Annexure P-1) in which, the review of the State before the Apex Court has also been dismissed. The date of joining and date of regularization of the petitioners read thus:- Name Date of Joining Date of Regularization i) Yash Pal 1-7-1988 15-6-2006 (Fitter Helper) ii) Pawant Kumar 1-2-1991 1-2-2007 (Skilled Majdoor) SHIVANI GUPTA 2016.05.24 13:47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

CWP No. 7619 of 2016 iii) Bagwan Singh 1-5-1984 16-2-2005 (Pump Operator) iv) Daljeet Singh 1-6-1996 24-5-2011 (Mali cum Chowkidar) v) Surjeet Singh 1-10-1988 17-6-2007 (Mali cum Chowkidar) vi) Thakur Dass 1-1-1989 1-7-2006 (Mali cum Chowkidar) vii) Satish Kumar 1-3-1988 20-4-2006 (Fitter Helper) Counsel submits that legal notice dated 14.03.2016 (Annexure P-2) has also been served upon the respondents but of no avail. Counsel further submits that he would be satisfied if the said legal notice is decided within a time bound frame.

Notice of motion.

Mr. R.S. Sidhu, AAG, Punjab accepts notice on behalf of the respondents. Copy of the writ petition has been supplied to him in Court. Keeping in view the limited relief sought, this Court is of the opinion that there is no need for the respondents to file reply. Accordingly, without commenting on the merits of the case, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent no. 1/competent authority to decide the legal notice dated 14.03.2016 (Annexure P-2) within a period of 3 months from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order. Needless to say if the relief is to be denied, a reasoned order be passed and conveyed to the petitioners.

20.05.2016 (G.S. SANDHAWALIA) shivani JUDGE SHIVANI GUPTA 2016.05.24 13:47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh