Punjab-Haryana High Court
Tirath Singh (Deceased) Through Lrs vs General Manager And Chairman on 24 July, 2013
C.W.P. No.3424 of 2011 -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
C.W.P. No.3424 of 2011
Date of decision : 24.07.2013
Tirath Singh (deceased) through LRs.
...... Petitioner
versus
General Manager and Chairman, Bhakra Beas Management Board,
Chandigarh and others
...... Respondents
CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI
***
Present : Mr. Madan Mohan, Advocate
for the petitioner.
Mr. Ajay Kumar Gupta, Advocate
for the respondents.
***
1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
2. To be referred to the Reporters or not?
3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?
AJAY TEWARI, J. (Oral)
The dispute in this case is whether the petitioner is entitled to count the work-charge service from 18.12.1969 to 31.01.1981 rendered in the erstwhile PSEB and the erstwhile Beas Construction Board for the purpose of pension before joining as a regular employee in the Bhakra Beas Management Board as per details given below:-
1) 18.12.1969 Electrician Gr.II Electrical Divn. No.1 Beas Construction to 7.3.1973 (Work-charge) BSL, Sundernagar Board.
2) 10.3.1973 Work-charge Gurunanak Thermal PSEB
to 8.9.1975 Plant, Bhatinda
Sharma Ashish
2013.07.30 16:17
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
Chandigarh
C.W.P. No.3424 of 2011 -2-
3) 12.9.1975 Foreman Dehar Power House Beas Construction
to 11.10.1977 Special Division Slapper Board
Work-charge
4) 12.10.1977 Foreman Electrical Mtc. Divn. Beas Construction
to 31.1.1981 Special Talwara Board
Work-charge
5) 1.2.1981 Foreman Add. SE PPH BBMB
to 31.3.2006 Special Division, BBMB
Regular (PW), Talwara
Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon Punjab State Electricity Board and another vs. Narata Singh and another, reported as 2010(3) RSJ 159, in which also there was a similar factual matrix and the Hon'ble Supreme Court has allowed the prayer. He has also relied upon the Full Bench decision of this Court in Kesar Chand vs. State of Punjab, reported as 1988(5) SLR 27, which has been approved by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the aforesaid judgment.
Learned counsel for the respondents has not been able to cite any contrary judgment. He has however pointed out that the petitioner had received full retrenchment benefits from the Beas Construction Board and is liable to refund the same.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has stated that he would have no objection in refunding the same but in the first instance the respondents should deduct the said amount from the money payable to him and in case any more amount is to be paid the same be notified to the LRs. of the petitioner and the said LRs will repay the same within a month thereafter.
In the circumstances, the petition is allowed and it is directed that the petitioner is entitled to count his work-charge service w.e.f. Sharma Ashish 2013.07.30 16:17 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh C.W.P. No.3424 of 2011 -3- 18.12.1969 to 31.01.1981 towards computation of retirement benefits. The respondents are directed to work out the same and release whatever benefits are due to the petitioner within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.
Since the main case has been decided, the pending civil miscellaneous application, if any, also stands disposed of.
( AJAY TEWARI )
July 24, 2013 JUDGE
ashish
Sharma Ashish
2013.07.30 16:17
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
Chandigarh