Jagdish Kumar vs Pepsu Road Transport Corporation on 3 September, 2013

[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Jagdish Kumar vs Pepsu Road Transport Corporation on 3 September, 2013

Bench: Rajiv Narain Raina

CWP No.19390 of 2013
                                                                            -1-


IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

                                        CWP No.19390 of 2013
                                        Date of Decision: 03.09.2013

Jagdish Kumar
                                                  ..... Petitioner

                              Versus

Pepsu Road Transport Corporation
                                                  ... Respondent

CORAM:-       HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV NARAIN RAINA

Present: Mr. Raman Sharma, Advocate,
         for the petitioner.

1. To be referred to the Reporters or not?
2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?

RAJIV NARAIN RAINA, J.(Oral)

Mr. Sharma submits that his client retired from service on reaching the age of superannuation on 31.12.2012 as a Senior Assistant from the Pepsu Road Transport Corporation, Patiala. The post is pensionable. The detail of dues which remain unpaid have been enumerated in Para 6 of the writ petition. These include leave encashment, gratuity, GPF, grade pay arrears etc. and medial bills. The petitioner has made representation dated 28.05.2013 (P-4) to the Corporation for release of pensionary benefits etc. Mr. Sharma admits that the petitioner is in receipt of pension of Rs.12,320/- per month from the Corporation but the other dues remain unpaid.

Since money is due and appears to be withheld illegally, a direction is issued to the respondents to consider the representation/request for release of dues as aforesaid within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. Since dues have not been paid and Mittal Manju 2013.09.05 09:37 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CWP No.19390 of 2013 -2- in case, they are found due, the petitioner would be entitled to interest @8.5% payable for fixed deposits in Nationalized Banks. However, interest will not carry on medical bills if found payable in view of the decision of the Supreme Court in Om Parkash Gargi vs. State of Punjab, (1996) 11 SCC 399.

Disposed of in the above terms.

(RAJIV NARAIN RAINA) 03.09.2013 JUDGE manju Mittal Manju 2013.09.05 09:37 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Punjab-Haryana High Court