Petitioners challenged non-counting of earlier service for pension benefits. Court directed transfer of Provident Fund amount to accrue juniority for retirement purposes.
Petition disposed; PF amount transferred to Municipal Council; prior service counted for retirement benefits within two 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.
HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CWP No.16644 of 2008 (O&M) Date of Decision: 21.02.2011
Darshan Singh & Ors.
VS.
State of Punjab & Ors.
. . . . Respondents
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?
Present: Mr. RK Arora, Advocate for the petitioners
Ms. Monica Chhibber Sharma, DAG Punjab
Mr. RS Cheema, Advocate for respondent No.4
Mr. RS Goel, Advocate for respondent No.5
SURYA KANT, J. (ORAL)
(1). The petitioners were regular employees of the Punjab Small Industries & Export Corporation Ltd. (in short, ‘the Corporation’) and they had joined their respective posts on different dates in the year 1978-1979, as descripted in para 2 of the writ petition. With the transfer of certain works of the Corporation to the Municipal Council, SAS Nagar, Mohali (erstwhile Notified Area Committee) in terms of the State Government decision dated 04.11.1991, the services of the petitioners were also transferred along on 18.11.1992. The petitioners have
CWP No.16644 of 2008.doc
thereafter retired from the services of the Municipal Council, SAS Nagar, Mohali, in the year 2006-2007. Since the service rendered by the petitioners in respondent No.5/Corporation has not been taken into account for the purposes of service/retiral benefits that they have approached this Court. It is alleged that the action of respondents is in violation of Rule 2(k) of the Punjab Municipal Employees Pension and General Provident Fund Rules, 1994.
(2). The Municipal Council, SAS Nagar, Mohali, has filed its reply/affidavit and in para 5 thereof it is averred that since the ‘Provident Fund’ amount of the petitioners, for the period of their service rendered in respondent No.5/Corporation, has not been transferred to the Municipal Council, SAS Nagar, Mohali by the Corporation that the pervious service rendered by them in the Corporation has not been counted for the purpose of retiral/pensionary benefits. Respondent No.5/Corporation has filed its reply/affidavit as well as an additional affidavit dated 18.12.2009 stating that the contribution towards the Provident Fund amount of the petitioners was duly deposited with the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Sector 17, Chandigarh
CWP No.16644 of 2008.doc
(3).
and it can be transferred to the Municipal Council, SAS Nagar, Mohali only with the consent of the petitioners. Learned counsel for the petitioners states that they have no objection and rather the petitioners shall facilitate the transfer of the said PF amount to the Municipal Council, SAS Nagar, Mohali.
(4).
In view of the above-stated consensus amongst the parties, the writ petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioners to approach the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Sector 17, Chandigarh for transfer of the contributory amount deposited by respondent No.5/Corporation in the Provident Fund account of the petitioners, to the Municipal Council, SAS Nagar, Mohali. If the petitioners have already withdrawn the said amount, they may deposit the same along with interest at the permissible rate, with the Municipal Council, SAS Nagar, Mohali. On deposit/transfer of the said amount, the Municipal Council, SAS Nagar, Mohali, is directed to count the service rendered by the petitioners in respondent No.5/Corporation for the purpose of retiral benefits.
(5). The needful shall be done within a period of two months from the date of transfer of such amount by the petitioners, in accordance with law.
(6). Ordered accordingly. Dasti .
CWP No.16644 of 2008.doc
21.02.2011 vishal shonkar
(S u r y a K a n t) Judge
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the service rendered by petitioners in the Corporation should be counted for retirement benefits after transfer to the Municipal Council.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Darshan Singh & Ors.
State of Punjab
Surya Kant
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
