Allowed

Chutmal v. U.H.B.v.N.Ltd and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC25 Nov 2010CWP/20997/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition, the High Court held that the petitioner is entitled to pensionary benefits including count of work charge service, relying on a Supreme Court judgment that settled the controversy. The court directed the respondents to count the service.

What did the court decide?

Respondents directed to count the petitioner's work charge service towards qualifying service for pensionary benefits.

Chutmal Vs U.H.B.v.N.Ltd and Ors. — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Punjab & Haryana HC (2010)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

CWP. No. 20997 of 2010 Date of Decision: 25.11.2010.

Chuthmal

--Petitioner

Versus

U.H.B.V.N. Ltd. and others

¶7

--Respondents

¶8

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE PERMOD KOHLI.

¶9

Present:Mr. Naveen Daryal, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶10

¶11

PERMOD KOHLI.J (ORAL)

¶12

Notice of motion.

¶13

Mr.Narender Hooda, Advocate present in the Court has been

¶14

asked to accept notice on behalf of respondents.

¶15

Keeping in view the controversy involved and with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, this petition is disposed of at motion stage itself.

¶16

The petitioner was appointed as Assistant Pump Driver on work charge basis w.e.f. 1.7.1973 to 20.11.1976. Thereafter, he was offered the post of Shift Attendant on ad hoc basis w.e.f. 20.11.1976. Later on his services were regularized as Shift Attendant w.e.f. 19.9.1977. Petitioner has retired from service as S.A on attaining the age of superannuation. Petitioner has filed this petition for counting of work charge service rendered by him for the purpose of qualifying service towards pensionary/retiral benefits.

¶17

It is agreed to by the learned counsel for the parties that the controversy involved in this petition is no more res integra having been settled by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Dakshin Haryana Bijli

¶18

CWP. No. 20997 of 2010

¶19

Vitran Nigam & Others vs. Bachan Singh (Civil Appeal No.4903 of 2009 decided on 30.7.2009.

¶20

In this view of the matter, the petitioner is entitled to the pensionary/retiral benefits by taking into consideration the work charge period rendered by him towards the qualifying service for the purposes of pensionary/retiral benefits on the basis of the judgment in Bachan Singh (supra) , a coordinate Bench of this Court in a bunch of writ petitions including CWP No.17805 of 2009 ( Bhunda Ram vs. UHBVNL and others decided on 25.2.2010) made following directions:-

¶21

“(9) For the reasons afore-stated, the writ petition is allowed and the respondents are directed to allow the petitioner to exercise his option in terms of the Circular dated 6.8.1993 (Annexure P-1)and/or subsequent circulars dated 9.8.1994 (Annexure P2) within a period of three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order and thereafter, the respondent-Corporation shall inform the petitioner the amount of employer's contribution towards EPF to be deposited by him alongwith interest within a period of one month as stipulated under the Instructions and upon receipt thereof, the petitioner shall deposit the same within a period of two months thereafter. After the receipt of amount to be deposited by the petitioner, the respondents are directed to count the work-charged service rendered by the petitioner w.e.f. 7.11.1968 to 16.1.1976 towards his pensionary benefits which shall accordingly be revised/released at the earliest.”

¶22

In view of the above, this petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to count the service rendered by the petitioner on work charge basis towards the qualifying service for pensionary/retiral benefits. Let the retiral/pensionary benefits be determined and released accordingly within three months from the date a certified copy of this order is received by the competent authority.

¶23

(PERMOD KOHLI)

¶24

JUDGE

¶25

25.11.2010. lucky

Chutmal v. U.H.B.v.N.Ltd and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chutmal v. U.H.B.v.N.Ltd and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rupinder Kaur Vs State of Haryana

Bhupender Singh Vs State of Haryana

Satish Kumar Vs Punjab State Ware Housing Corp. Chandigarh

Pal Singh Vs State of Haryana & Ors.

Maan Singh Vs State of Punjab

Vikas Kumar Vs State of Haryana and Ors.