The High Court disposed of a writ petition regarding pension/grade increments as infructuous since the petitioner's dues were already disbursed and he had retired.
The writ petition was disposed of as infructuous with no further direction.
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.
CWP No.14293 of 1993.doc
HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CWP No.14293 of 1993 (O&M) Date of Decision: 06.04.2010
Parmod Kumar
VS.
State of Punjab and others . . . . . Respondents
CORAM : HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT
****
1. Whethis Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
2. To be referred to the Reporters or not?
3. Whethis the judgment should be reported in the Digest?
Present: None for the petitioner
Ms. Charu Tuli, Sr. DAG, Punjab
SURYA KANT J. (ORAL)
(2). The respondents have filed a short affidavit of Arvind Parkash Verma, Tehildar, Shahkot dated 01.04.2010, which is taken on record, wherein, it is averred that during the pendency of this writ petition, the petitioner was merged in the cadre of the Deputy Commissioner, Jalandhar’s office as a Clerk on 16.08.1996 and thereafter he worked in different offices at Jalandhar including as Registration Clerk in the Tehsil Office at
CWP No.14293 of 1993.doc
Shahpur, before retiring w.e.f. 30.04.2008 on attaining the age of superannuation.
(SURYA KANT) JUDGE
06.04.2010
vishal shonkar
Parmod Kumar
State of Punjab
SURYA KANT
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
