Punjab-Haryana High Court
Kanwar Bhan vs The State Of Haryana And Others on 16 November, 2012
Author: Augustine George Masih
Bench: Augustine George Masih
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CWP No. 22570 of 2012
Date of Decision : 16.11.2012
Kanwar Bhan ..... Petitioner(s)
Versus
The State of Haryana and others ..... Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH
Present:- Mr. J.S. Bedi, Advocate, for the petitioner(s).
AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH, J. (ORAL)
Petitioner worked with the Haryana State Minor Irrigation and Tubewell Corporation (in short 'HSMITC') from 24.4.1980 to 15.3.1993. He was transferred,on the winding up of the HSMITC, to the Labour Department, Haryana, vide order dated 9.3.1993 (Annexure-P-1) and he joined the said department on 16.3.1993. A specific order was passed by the Labour Court, Haryana, dated 15.7.1993 (Annexure-P-2) for counting the service rendered by the petitioner in HSMITC towards the fixation of pay of the petitioner. Petitioner was promoted as a Clerk and he retired on 28.2.2010 from the office of Assistant Director Industrial Safety and Health, Panipat-respondent No. 3. Petitioner was not granted the benefit of service, which he had rendered in HSMITC from 24.4.1980 to 15.3.1993, on his retirement and the said period was not taken into consideration for any retiral benefits. Petitioner submitted a representation dated 8.7.2010 (Annexure-P-4) to the Labour Commissioner, Haryana-respondent No. 2, requesting for counting of his service rendered by him in HSMITC towards his pensionary benefits. A representation was also sent to the Assistant Director, Industrial Safety and Health, Panipat- respondent No. 3. The claim of the petitioner was recommended and CWP No. 22570 of 2012 -2- forwarded by respondent No. 3 to the Labour Commissioner, Haryana, Chandigarh-respondent No. 2, vide Memo No. 1961, dated 4.10.2010 (Annexure-P-6), but till date no decision thereon has been taken or conveyed to the petitioner.
Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is entitled to the claim as has been made by him in his representation. An undertaking has also been given by the petitioner that he is ready and willing to return the amount of the employees' provident fund, which he had received alongwith the interest, so that the period rendered by him in HSMITC is counted towards the pensionary benefits, as per the policy of the Government of Haryana. But that also has not been taken into consideration by the respondents till date as no decision thereon has been taken.
Counsel contends that the petitioner, at this stage, would be satisfied if a direction is issued to respondent No. 2-Labour Commissioner, Haryana, to consider and decide the claim of the petitioner as forwarded by respondent No. 3-Assistant Director, Industrial Safety and Health, Panipat, vide Memo No. 1961, dated 4.10.2010 (Annexure-P-6) within some specified time.
Without going into the merits of the case or commenting thereon, this petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No. 2-Labour Commissioner, Haryana, to consider and decide the claim of the petitioner as forwarded by respondent No. 3-Assistant Director, Industrial Safety and Health, Panipat, vide Memo No. 1961, dated 4.10.2010 (Annexure-P-6) within a period of two months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. The decision so taken be conveyed to the petitioner forthwith. CWP No. 22570 of 2012 -3-
In case the petitioner is held entitled to the benefit as claimed by him and forwarded by respondent No. 3-Assistant Director, Industrial Safety and Health, Panipat, vide Memo No. 1961, dated 4.10.2010 (Annexure-P-6), consequential benefits be granted to the petitioner within a further period of two months. If the claim as projected by the petitioner is not to be accepted, then a speaking and well reasoned order be passed by respondent No. 2 and the same be conveyed to the petitioner forthwith.
(AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH) JUDGE 16.11.2012 sjks