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 0, Cited by 0]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Raj Rani vs Vineet Garg Managing Director Hpgcl ... on 16 February, 2018

Author: Jaswant Singh

Bench: Jaswant Singh

COCP No.2047 of 2017 (O&M)                                               -1-
222
      IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA
                   AT CHANDIGARH

                                           COCP No.2047 of 2017 (O&M)
                                           Date of Decision: 16.02.2018


RAJ RANI
                                                               .......... Petitioner
                                         Versus

SH. VINEET GARG, MANAGING DIRECTOR, HPGCL, PANCHKULA

                                                             .......... Respondent


CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH

Present:     Mr. Jawahar Narang, Advocate for the petitioner.

             Mr. Gaurav Jindal, Advocate for the respondent.

               ****

JASWANT SINGH, J. (ORAL)

The petitioner-Raj Rani had filed writ petition bearing CWP No.25857 of 2014, seeking, inter alia, quashing the impugned action of the respondent to reject her claim for family pension, claimed by the widow of an employee, who had died on 23.08.1987 after completing 10 years of service on work-charge basis of Cleaner-cum-Messenger. The said writ petition was disposed of by this Court vide order dated 18.02.2016 (Annexure P-1) with a direction 'to respondent to consider the case of the petitioner for family pension and grant her family pension, in view of judgment of Lajwanti's case and the petitioner shall be entitled for arrears of 38 months prior to date of filing of the writ petition.

Since the needful was not done, hence the present contempt petition.

1 of 2 ::: Downloaded on - 25-02-2018 21:49:04 ::: COCP No.2047 of 2017 (O&M) -2- Upon notice, a reply stands filed, where in para No.4, it is stated that arrears of payment of Rs.4,56,105/- have been disbursed to the petitioner vide cheque No.484512 dated 16.11.2017, therefore, the order in question has been complied. A copy of the Pension Payment Order (PPO) dated 09.11.2017 in favour of the petitioner-Raj Rani is enclosed as Anneuxre R-1 / R-2.

In view of above, learned counsel for the respondent states that the order dated 18.02.2016 (P-1) has been complied with and no further action is warranted in the present contempt petition.

At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner prays for withdrawal the present contempt petition.

Dismissed as withdrawn.

February 16, 2018                                     ( JASWANT SINGH )
'rajneesh'                                                 JUDGE


             Whether Speaking/reasoned                  Yes/No
             Whether Reportable                         Yes/No




                                  2 of 2
               ::: Downloaded on - 25-02-2018 21:49:05 :::