Punjab-Haryana High Court
Krishan Kumar Rakheja vs State Of Haryana And Others ... on 22 April, 2010
Author: Permod Kohli
Bench: Permod Kohli
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
CWP. No. 7160 of 2010
Date of Decision: 22.4.2010.
Krishan Kumar Rakheja --Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana and others --Respondents
CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE PERMOD KOHLI.
Present:- Mr. R.K. Malik, Sr. Advocate with
Ms. Aditi Dogra, Advocate for the petitioner.
***
PERMOD KOHLI.J (ORAL) Notice of motion.
Mr. R.S. Kundu, Addl. A.G., Haryana has been asked to accept notice on behalf of respondents-State.
Keeping in view the nature of relief claimed and with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, this petition is being disposed of at the motion stage itself.
The petitioner was serving as a Junior Engineer in the State of Haryana. He retired from service on 31.1.2008 on attaining the age of superannuation. It is stated that the petitioner has not been granted the benefit of the revised pay scales w.e.f. 1.1.1996, though, similarly situated persons are granted such benefit. Apart from the above, it is stated that the benefit of increment was also not granted to the petitioner due to non- availability of service book after the year 2000. It is admitted that on that count the retiral benefits have not been paid to the petitioner. Petitioner made a number of representations, copies whereof have been placed on record as Annexures P-2 to P-8. Even the Engineer-in-Chief, Haryana vide communication dated 24.4.2008 asked the Superintending Engineer, PWD CWP. No. 7160 of 2010 -2- W/S & Sanitation Circle, Rohtak and Executive Engineer of the same department of Division No.1 why the retiral benefits have not been released in favour of the petitioner. Vide another communication dated 10.6.2008 Superintending Engineer has been asked to locate the service book to avoid harassment to the retiree i.e the petitioner. Despite these communications, respondents have not settled the retiral claims of the petitioner.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner would be satisfied, if, respondents are directed to take decision on the representations made by the petitioner, referred to above.
In view of the above, this petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent no.2 to take decision on the representations made by the petitioner by settling all his retiral benefits within a period of three months from the date certified copy of this order is served upon the said respondent. If, the claim of the petitioner is found sustainable, the petitioner shall be paid all admisible retiral and other service benefits like increments, pay revision etc. Petitioner shall also be entitled to the statutory interest on G.P.F, death-cum-retirement gratuity and @ 6% on other pensionary benefits. Needless to say that in the event the claim of the petitioner is to be rejected, the same shall be by a reasoned and speaking order.
(PERMOD KOHLI) JUDGE 22.4.2010.
lucky