Disposed

Kulwant Singh v. Mohinder Singh Chahal and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC18 May 2009COCP/1761/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A memory petition regarding arrears of pay and allowances was rendered infructuous as the High Court had already directed payment and the respondent subsequently paid the adjusted amount plus undertaken to pay the balance. Associated commercial petitions were also disposed as infructuous.

What did the court decide?

Rule discharged; C.O.C.P. and C.M. petitions disposed of as infructuous.

Kulwant Singh Vs Mohinder Singh… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Punjab & Haryana HC (2009)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

C.O.C.P. No. 1761 of 2008 (O&M) Date of Decision : May 18, 2009

¶3

Constable Kulwant Singh

¶4

....Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

Mohinder Singh Chahal and others

¶7

.....Respondents

¶8

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.P.S. MANN

¶9

Present : Mr. S.K. Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶10

Mr. M.C. Berry, Additional Advocate General, Punjab for the respondents

¶11

T.P.S. MANN, J. (Oral)

¶12

On August 04, 2008 while allowing the writ petition filed by the petitioner, a Division Bench of the High Court directed the respondents to give pay and allowances to him by treating the period from 6.7.1993 to 1.12.2003 on duty with all the consequential benefits in accordance with law.

¶13

Separate replies have already been filed by respondents No. 1 and 2. In his reply, respondent No. 2 has stated that the order dated 4.8.2008 passed by the High Court has been implemented by way of giving all the financial benefits to the petitioner vide office order dated 23.1.2009 for the period from 6.7.1993 to 1.12.2003 during which he remained out of the service. An amount of Rs.6,52,009/- stands paid to the petitioner towards arrears of pay and allowances which has been personally accepted by him.

¶14

To the rejoinder filed by the petitioner, a counter-affidavit has been filed today on behalf of respondent No.2 in the Court. The calculations

¶15

C.O.C.P. No. 1761 of 2008 (O&M)

¶16

-2-

¶17

made by the respondents while paying an amount of Rs.6,52,009/- have been described in para 1 of the same. According to respondent No.2, apart from the aforementioned amount, the petitioner is also entitled to another amount of Rs.1,13,027/-, which includes Rs.44,945/- as HRA, Rs.49,985/- as compensatory pay, Rs.3,120/- as K.M.A., Rs.2,496/- as C.A. and Rs.12,481/as C.C.A. Respondent No.2 has undertaken to make the payment of Rs.1,13,027/- to the petitioner within a period of one week.

¶18

In para 3 of the counter-affidavit filed on behalf of respondent No.2,, it also stands mentioned that the petitioner has already been given time bound promotional scales under Assured Career Progression Scheme w.e.f. 9.9.1999 by raising his pay from Rs.4020/- to Rs.4140/- per month and placing him in the next higher pay scales.

¶19

In view of the above, the present petition has been rendered infructuous, and is, accordingly, disposed of. Rule is discharged.

¶20

As the pay of the petitioner stands fixed and time bound promotional scales given to him, C.M. No. 8821-CII of 2009 and C.M. No. 2519-CII of 2009 are rendered infructuous, and accordingly, disposed of.

¶21

( T.P.S. MANN ) JUDGE

¶22

May 18, 2009 satish

Kulwant Singh v. Mohinder Singh Chahal and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kulwant Singh v. Mohinder Singh Chahal and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ashok Kumar Vs Anurag Rastogi, Commissioner and Director Gen. Sch. Edu. Hry.

Basant Kumar Vs Rakesh Kumar and Anr.

Kuldip Singh and Ors. Vs Ram Gopal Chadha and Ors.

Jaskaran Singh and Ors. Vs Megh Raj and Ors.

Pirthvi Singh Vs Vijay Singh

Raj Kumar Goel Vs R.N. Prashar and Ors.