Ranjeet Singh v. Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd & ORS

CWP No.6389 OF 2018 --1--

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CWP No.6389 OF 2018 DECIDED ON: MARCH 15, 2018 RANJEET SINGH .....PETITIONER

VERSUS

PUNJAB STATE POWER CORP. LTD.

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

Present:

Mr. Kewal Krishan, Advocate, for the petitioner.

***** JASPAL SINGH, J Through instant petition preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, petitioner has sought issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to grant the pension and other pensionary benefits by counting daily wages/work charge service w.e.f. 19.09.1986 to 31.03.1994 ( which becomes 7 years, 6 months and 12 days) along with regular service w.e.f. 01.04.1994 to 30.06.2016 (regular service 22 years) as such total length including both the service is about 29 years 8 months along with interest. 2.

At the very outset of the arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though legal notice dated 18.01.2018 (Annexure P-6) was duly served upon the respondents but till date no action has been taken by the respondents. He further submits that petitioner feels satisfied, in case, direction is issued to respondents to decide aforesaid legal notice, within some Sonika 2018.03.15 17:15 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

CWP No.6389 OF 2018 --2-- prescribed period.

3.

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant petition is disposed of with the direction to respondent No.1-Chairmancum-Managing Director, Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd., Patiala to look into the grievances unfolded by the petitioner in legal notice dated 18.01.2018 (Annexure P-6) and to decide the same particularly in view of judgments passed by Full Bench of this Court, captioned as "Kesar Chand v. State of Punjab through the Secretary, PWDB & R, Chandigarh and others" 1988 AIR (Punjab) 265 and Division Bench of this Court titled as "Kashmir Chand v. Punjab State Electricity Board and others, 2005(4) SCT 298, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. 4.

However, if the petitioner still feels dissatisfied against the order passed by the concerned authority, he shall be at liberty to have recourse to the other remedies available under law as well as to approach this Court. MARCH 15, 2018 (JASPAL SINGH) sonika JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No Sonika 2018.03.15 17:15 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh