Disposed

Charanjit Lal Katyal v. State of Pb. & Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC7 Sept 2011CWP/19395/2005

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition seeking quashing of an order, grant of All Category Pension, and pensionary benefits. The Court directed a Departmental Committee to examine the petitioner's claim for ACP and pay scale review within four months.

What did the court decide?

The Civil Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to the Agricultural Department Committee to examine the petitioner's claim for ACP and pay scale and dispose of it within four months.

Charanjit Lal Katyal Vs State of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Punjab & Haryana HC (2011)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

CWP No. 19395 of 2005 Date of Decision: 07.09.2011

Charanjit Lal

...Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab and others

¶7

..Respondents.

¶8

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT

¶9

Present : Mr. Namit Kumar, Advocate, for the petitioner.

¶10

Ms. Sudeepti Sharma, DAG, Punjab for the respondents.

¶11

¶12

SURYA KANT, J.(Oral)

¶13

CM No. 16534 of 2010

¶14

Heard. With the consent of learned counsel for the

¶15

parties, the main case is taken on board. C.M. Stands disposed of.

¶16

CWP No. 19395 of 2005

¶17

Besides seeking quashing of order dated 21.10.2005, the petitioner also seeks a direction for the grant of A.C.P. on completion of 16 years of service as Head Draftsman and for consequential revision of pensionary benefits from the date of his retirement i.e. 01.07.2002. It is apparent from the plea taken by the respondents in the reply/affidavit that the petitioner's claim regarding grant of ACP on completion of 16 years of service as Head Draftsman was not considered earlier and kept pending due to pendency of Civil Writ Petition No. 5551 of 2000 titled as ' Ajit Singh and another V. State of Haryana '. The above said writ petition has since been decided by

¶18

CWP No. 19395 of 2005

¶19

[2]

¶20

this Court. There is thus no rhyme or reason for the respondents not to take appropriate decision regarding the petitioner's claim for the grant of ACP after completion of 16 years service as Head Draftsman.

¶21

As regards the grant of pay scale of ` 2000-3500/- w.e.f. 01.01.1986 as per the memo dated 13.06.1991 issued by the State Government, learned counsel for the parties are ad-idem that the petitioner's claim deserves to be examined by a Committee constituted in the Agricultural Department in terms of the order dated 02.03.2010 passed by this Court in Civil Writ Petition No. 16323 of 2008 (Smt. Sudarshna Devi & another V. State of Punjab & others).

¶22

The writ petition is accordingly disposed of in the above mentioned terms, however, with a direction to the Departmental Committee to dispose of the claim of the petitioner within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.

Dasti .

07.09.2011

' ravinder'

(SURYA KANT) JUDGE

Charanjit Lal Katyal v. State of Pb. & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Charanjit Lal Katyal v. State of Pb. & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Hardeep Singh Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Inderjit Singh Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Veer Singh & Ors. Vs State of Punjab & Ors.

Gurmeet Singh Vs St of Pb and Ors.

Prem Singh Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Gita Ram Garg Vs State of Punjab and Ors.