The petitioner, a retired municipal servant, sought release of retiral benefits. Respondent counsel stated that all dues or their accrual within three months, leading the petitioner to withdraw the petition.
Petition dismissed as not pressed after respondent agreed to pay remaining dues within three months.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
-1-
Civil Writ Petition. No.21560 of 2008
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Civil Writ Petition. No.21560 of 2008 Decided on : 26-05-2009
Harbhajan Kaur
.... Petitioner
VERSUS
State of Punjab and others
.... Respondents
CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SATISH KUMAR MITTAL .
Present:Mr. J.S. Lalli, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. S.S. Gill, D. A.G., Punjab, for respondent Nos.1 to 3.
Mr. Chander Mohan Sharma, Advocate, for respondent No.4.
SATISH KUMAR MITTAL, J (Oral).
The petitioner, who has retired from the services of Municipal Council, Batala on 31.10.2008 on attaining the age of superannuation, has filed the instant petition for issuing direction to the respondents to release all the retiral benefits to her.
In the written statement filed on behalf of respondent No.4, it has been stated that an amount of Rs.95,329/- on account of leave encashment has been paid to the petitioner vide cheque
-2-
Civil Writ Petition. No.21560 of 2008
No.36462 dated 31.10.2008 and an amount of Rs.1,55,531/- on account of provident fund has also been paid on 16.2.2009. It has been further stated that an amount of Rs.1,76,359/- on account of commutation of pension has been paid on 12.3.2009. Pension for another two months has also been released vide PPO No.6757. It has been further stated that the payment of gratuity which is Rs.1.66 lacs, will be paid to the petitioner in the next three months as the financial position of the respondent-Council is not sound.
Learned counsel for respondent No.4 on instructions from the respondent-Council states that all the remaining retiral dues will also be paid to the petitioner within a period of three months.
In view of the said statement made by counsel for respondent No.4, learned counsel for the petitioner does not want to press this petition.
Dismissed as not pressed.
(SATISH KUMAR MITTAL) JUDGE
26th May, 2009. Monika
Harbhajan Kaur
State of Punjab
Satish Kumar Mittal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
