High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCWP/6689/2018disposed of

Raj Rani v. State Of Punjab And ORS.

2018-03-19Mr. Justice Rameshwar Singh Malik2 pages

CWP No.6689 OF 2018 --1--

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CWP No.6689 OF 2018 DECIDED ON: MARCH 19, 2018 RAJ RANI .....PETITIONER

VERSUS

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

Present:

Mr. R.K. Arora, Advocate, for the petitioner.

***** JASPAL SINGH, J Through instant petition preferred under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India, petitioner has sought issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari, quashing the action of the respondents in not releasing the balance pension @ 10% from the date of retirement and to quash memo dated 05.03.2016 (P-6), whereby respondent No.2 has refused to release salary for the period 01.04.2015 to 14.12.2015 on the ground that extension in service was not approved as well as to quash impugned order dated 27.02.2017 (P-7) whereby 5% cut in pension has been imposed for one year. AND FURTHER directing the respondents to release salary w.e.f. 01.04.2015 to 14.12.2015 with interest and also to pay interest on delayed payment of retiral benefits. 2.

At the very outset of the arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner feels satisfied, in case, direction is issued to Sonika 2018.03.20 10:36 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

CWP No.6689 OF 2018 --2-- respondent No.2 to decide legal notice dated 22.12.2017 (Annexure P-9) duly served upon the respondents, within some 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.2-The Director of Public Instruction (SE), PSEB Building, Phase VIII Mohali to look into the grievances unfolded by the petitioner in legal notice dated 22.12.2017 (Annexure P-9) and to decide the same, 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, she shall be at liberty to have recourse to the other remedies available under law as well as to approach this Court. MARCH 19, 2018 (JASPAL SINGH) sonika JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No Sonika 2018.03.20 10:36 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh