Dev Raj v. Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd & ORS

CWP No.3746 OF 2017 --1--

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CWP No.3746 OF 2017 DECIDED ON: FEBRUARY 26, 2018 DEV RAJ .....PETITIONER

VERSUS

PUNJAB STATE POWER CORP.

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

Present:

Mr. Shashi Kumar Rattan, Advocate, for the petitioner.

Ms. Sunnit Kaur, AAG, Punjab.

***** JASPAL SINGH, J (Oral) Ms. Amanpreet Sandhu, Advocate has appeared and filed power of attorney on behalf of the respondents. The same is taken on record. 2.

By virtue of instant petition preferred under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India, petitioner has sought issuance of a writ especially in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to grant revised pension and other pensionary benefits by counting work charge service w.e.f. 13.09.1986 to 03.04.1997 as well as regular service w.e.f. 04.04.1997 to 31.05.2015 along with interest @ 12% p.a.

3.

At the very outset of the arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the matter is already pending before the respondents and is under consideration on the basis of representation dated 04.11.2016 Sonika 2018.03.01 10:50 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

CWP No.3746 OF 2017 --2-- (Annexure P-4). He further submits that petitioner feels satisfied, in case, direction is issued to respondents to consider aforesaid representation and take conscious decision in a time bound manner.

4.

In the light of aforesaid facts and circumstances but without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, instant petition is disposed of with the direction to respondent No.3-Senior Executive Engineer, Distribution Division, PSPCL, Dasuya, Hoshiarpur to take into consideration the grievances unfolded by the petitioner in representation (Annexure P-4) and take a conscious decision within a period of three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. In case, respondent(s) does not agree with the various submissions made by the petitioner in his representation, in that event, to pass a speaking order considering all aspects referred to in the representation and in such situation, the petitioner shall be at liberty to have recourse to the other remedies available under law as well as to approach this Court. FEBRUARY 26, 2018 (JASPAL SINGH) sonika JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes Whether reportable Yes/No Sonika 2018.03.01 10:50 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh