Partly allowed
Partap Ji Arora and Anr. v. State of Punjab Anr.
Punjab & Haryana HCCWP/16531/2010
Case brief
from the order text
What is this about?
COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA…
What the court decided
AI extract
COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA…
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.
C.W.P. No.16531 of 2010 . [O&M] Date of Decision: 23rd February, 2011 .
Er. Pratap Ji Arora & Anr.
Petitioners through Mr. Sanjiv Bansal, Advocate
Versus
State of Punjab & Ors. Respondents through Ms. Sudeepti Sharma, DAG, Punjab for respondent No.1. Mr. B.S.Jolly, Advocate, for respondents No. 2 and 3.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT.
1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not?
3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?
SURYA KANT, J. [ORAL]
The petitioners seek quashing of the impugned order dated 26.08.2010 [Annexure P-13] whereby the Punjab State Power Corporation Limited – respondent No. 2 has declined to grant pensionary benefits to them for the services rendered with the Chief Engineer, Western Command, MES, c/o 56 APO, Chandi Mandir, Panchkula – respondent No. 3.
Learned counsel for the respondents fairly state that the controversy involved in this writ petition stands answered by an order dated 5th October, 2010 passed by this Court in CWP No. 12278 of 2010 [Er. Ramesh Chander Mahajan v State of Punjab & Ors.
The writ petition is accordingly disposed of in the same terms. The needful shall be done within a period of six months from the date a certified copy of this order is received.
Disposed of. Dasti .
February 23, 2011. ( SURYA KANT ) dinesh JUDGE
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioners' claim for quashing the order denying pensionary benefits requires separate adjudication given a prior order on similar facts.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Er. Ramesh Chander Mahajan v State of Punjab & Ors.Followed¶13
CWP No. 12278 of 2010 [Er. Ramesh Chander Mahajan v State of Punjab & Ors.]
Er. Pratap Ji Arora & Anr.
State of Punjab
Punjab State Power Corporation Limited
Chief Engineer, Western Command, MES
Surya Kant
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court