Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Satyavir Singh vs Haryana State Agriculture Marketing ... on 18 April, 2018

Author: Jaspal Singh

Bench: Jaspal Singh

CWP No.9136 OF 2018                                              --1--


           IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                         AT CHANDIGARH

                                       CWP No.9136 OF 2018
                                       DECIDED ON: APRIL 18, 2018


SATYAVIR SINGH                                               .....PETITIONER

                                   VERSUS


HARYANA STATE AGRICULTURE                                  .....RESPONDENTS
MARKETING BOARD AND ANOTHER


CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASPAL SINGH

Present:   Mr. S.K. Hooda, Advocate,
           for the petitioner.

           *****

JASPAL SINGH, J.

By virtue of instant petition preferred under Articles 226 of the Constitution of India, petitioner has sought a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to pay all the retiral benefits including pension and other due benefits by counting their past service rendered with HSMITC with interest @ 18% per annum in terms of judgments dated 14.01.2016 (Annexures P-6 to P-7) passed by this Court in CWP No. 3792 of 2012 and CWP No. 10017 of 2014 as well as in terms of judgment dated 05.10.2016 (P-8) passed in LPA No. 1805 of 2016 vide which appeal filed by State was dismissed and judgment dated 14.01.2016 (P-6 and P-7) were upheld and also in terms of judgment dated 04.03.2016 passed in CWP No. 7327 of 2015 (P-9) which was also upheld vide judgment dated 06.12.2016 passed in LPA No. 2362 of 2016 by the Division Bench.


                                      1 of 2
                   ::: Downloaded on - 06-05-2018 16:53:02 :::
 CWP No.9136 OF 2018                                               --2--


2. At the very outset of the arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner feels satisfied in case direction is issued to respondents to decide legal notice dated 15.12.2017 (P-3) in terms of judgments (P-6 to P-9) mentioned above within a stipulated period.

3. Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, instant petition is disposed of with a direction to respondents to look into the grievances unfolded by the petitioner in legal notice dated 15.12.2017 (P-3) and to decide the same in terms of judgments (P-6 to P-9) mentioned above within a period of three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.

4. However, if petitioner still feels aggrieved by any order of the aforesaid authority, he shall be at liberty to approach this Court.

APRIL 18, 2018                                         (JASPAL SINGH)
sonika                                                      JUDGE

Whether speaking/reasoned        Yes
Whether reportable               Yes/No




                                       2 of 2
                    ::: Downloaded on - 06-05-2018 16:53:03 :::