Disposed

Gurmeet Singh Swag v. State of Punjab & Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC25 May 2011CWP/14681/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition regarding arrears of pay and earned leave encashment after the parties reached an amicable resolution in open court, wherein the petitioner forgoes other claims but seeks wages for a specific period and leave compensation.

What did the court decide?

The respondent was directed to pay the petitioner the difference in pay and encash earned leaves within sixty days.

Gurmeet Singh Swag Vs State of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Punjab & Haryana HC (2011)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

C.W.P.No.14681 of 2010 Date of Decision:- 25.05.2011

Gurmeet Singh Swag

....Petitioner(s)

vs.

State of Punjab and others

¶7

....Respondent(s)

¶8

¶9

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH

¶10

¶11

Present:Mr.S.S.Swaich, Advocate, for the petitioner and Petitioner in person.

¶12

Ms.Sudeepti Sharma, DAG, Punjab, for respondents No.1 and 2.

¶13

Mr.Varinder Singh, Advocate for Dr.Puneet Kaur Sekhon, Advocate, for respondent No.3.

¶14

Mr.Balbir Singh, Advocate, for respondents No.4 to 6 with Sh.Ranjit Singh, Principal of Respondent No.5.

¶15

¶16

AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH, J. (Oral)

¶17

The matter has been amicably resolved.

¶18

Petitioner, who is present in Court, states that he forgoes all his claims against the respondents but only puts-forth his claim for the difference of pay for the period he had worked with respondents No.4 and 5 as Principal i.e. from 16.4.2009 till 11.8.2010. He further states that there are some earned leaves which are pending with the respondents, which he had earned during his service with respondents No.4 and 5, may also be encashed in his favour.

¶19

Counsel for respondents No.4 and 5, on instructions from

¶20

C.W.P.No.14681 of 2010

¶21

-2-

¶22

Sh.Ranjit Singh, Principal of respondent No.5, states that a laptop was in the custody of the petitioner which he has not returned. As regards the difference, between the pay given to the petitioner and which he was granted vide order dated 16.4.2009 (Annexure P-7), it has been stated that it shall be paid to him along with the amount for earned leave which would be in the credit of the petitioner, remitted to him within a period of 60 days from today.

¶23

Petitioner states that ` 25,000/- may be deducted from the amount, which he is entitled to, on account of the laptop which was handed over to the petitioner. The other statutory benefits, if any, will be released to the petitioner provided that he fills up the forms and fulfills the other the requirements for the said purpose.

¶24

The parties would be bound by the statements made by them in

¶25

Court.

¶26

The petition is disposed of in above terms.

¶27

May 25, 2011 ( AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH ) poonam JUDGE

Gurmeet Singh Swag v. State of Punjab & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gurmeet Singh Swag v. State of Punjab & 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

Mahant Gulab Dass Vs State of Punjab & Anr.

Randhir Singh Vs State of Haryana & Ors.

Chandan Parkash Vs Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd. & Ors.

Hem Singh Himalayan Vs Pseb & Ors.

Kanchan Sharma Vs Punjab & Haryana High Court & Anr.

Jai Singh Vs Panjab University and Ors.