Rameshwar Dayal vs Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam ... on 5 November, 2009

[Cites 0, Cited by 2]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Rameshwar Dayal vs Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam ... on 5 November, 2009

Bench: Satish Kumar Mittal

      IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
                     CHANDIGARH.

                                                   C.W.P. No. 16893 of 2009
                                          DATE OF DECISION : 05.11.2009

Rameshwar Dayal

                                                              ... PETITIONER
                                    Versus
Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Limited, Panchkula and another

                                                         ..... RESPONDENTS


CORAM :- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SATISH KUMAR MITTAL


Present:     Mr. Azad Singh, Advocate,
             for the petitioner.

                            ***

SATISH KUMAR MITTAL , J. ( Oral ) The petitioner, who has retired as Assistant Lineman from the respondent Nigam on 31.7.2006, on attaining the age of superannuation, has filed the instant petition for issuing direction to the respondents to release his retiral benefits, which have not been released till date, without any justification and reason.

It is the case of the petitioner that in spite of the fact that no enquiry or disciplinary proceedings is pending against him and he had retired from service more than 3 years ago, the respondents are not releasing the retiral benefits to the petitioner, despite the various representations made by him. Counsel states that ultimately, in this regard, the petitioner served a legal notice dated 2.7.2009 upon the respondents, copy of which has been CWP No. 16893 of 2009 -2- annexed as Annexure P-2, but till date, no decision has been taken on the same. Counsel states that at this stage, the petitioner will be satisfied if a direction is issued to the Executive Officer, Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Limited, Sonepat (respondent No.2 herein) to consider and decide the said legal notice within a reasonable time.

In view of the above, without issuing notice of motion as it will un-necessary delay the matter, this petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No.2 to consider and decide the legal notice dated 2.7.2009 (Annexure P-2) in accordance with law, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. In case, the petitioner is found entitled to any amount, the respondents are directed to release the same to the petitioner, immediately.

November 05, 2009                           ( SATISH KUMAR MITTAL )
ndj                                                  JUDGE

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Punjab-Haryana High Court