Punjab-Haryana High Court
Nahar Singh vs Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd ... on 19 September, 2019
Author: Harsimran Singh Sethi
Bench: Harsimran Singh Sethi
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH.
(125) CWP-26637-2019
Date of Decision: September 19, 2019
Nahar Singh .. Petitioner
Versus
Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd through its Chairman cum
Managing Director and others .. Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI
Present: Mr. D.R. Punia, Advocate, for the petitioner.
HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI, J.(ORAL)
In the present writ petition, the grievance which is being raised by the petitioner is that the petitioner was compulsory retired from service vide order dated 06.03.2009 and after the compulsory retirement, petitioner was entitled for the benefit of pension as the petitioner had requisite service to his credit for being granted the pensionary benefits as he was working with the respondents since 15.02.1977, but no benefit has been extended to the petitioner without any valid justification.
Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner filed a writ petition being CWP No.6488 of 2017 claiming that benefit, which was dismissed as withdrawn by the petitioner on 13.09.2017 with liberty to approach the respondents authorities by raising the said grievance. Though petitioner submitted a representation on 23.09.2017 (Annexure P-3), which is not being decided by the respondents and prejudice is being caused to the petitioner. Counsel for the petitioner prays that direction be issued to the respondents to release the pensionary benefits of the petitioner forthwith.
Learned counsel for the petitioner states that for the relief which has been claimed in the present writ petition, the petitioner has 1 of 2 ::: Downloaded on - 02-10-2019 00:53:51 ::: CWP-26637-2019 -2- submitted a representation dated 23.09.2017 (Annexure P-3) to the respondents, which is still pending consideration with the respondents and the petitioner will be satisfied, at this stage, in case a time bound direction is issued to the respondents to decide the said representation by passing an appropriate speaking order.
Keeping in view the advance notice given, Mr. M.K. Dogra, Advocate, who is present in the Court, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents and states that the respondents-Corporation has no objection for the grant of prayer for deciding the representation, if not already decided.
Without commenting upon the merits of the case or about the entitlement of the petitioner for the relief which has been claimed by him in the representation dated 23.09.2017 (Annexure P-3), the present writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to decide the representation dated 23.09.2017 (Annexure P-3), within a period of three months from the receipt of certified copy of this order.
In case, it is found that the petitioner is entitled for any monetary benefits after the decision of the representation, the same should also be paid to him within three months thereafter.
(HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI)
September 19, 2019 JUDGE
harsha
Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes
Whether reportable: No
2 of 2
::: Downloaded on - 02-10-2019 00:53:52 :::