Disposed

Prem Nath Bhalla and Ors. v. State of Punjab and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC6 Jan 2012CWP/9089/1994

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court held the writ petition infructuous for petitioners 1-8 as benefits were granted via circular dated 20.9.1994. It directed the respondents to examine the case of petitioner No. 9, determine dues, and pass orders within three months.

What did the court decide?

Respondents directed to examine petitioner No. 9, pass orders within three months, and pay dues to her within one month. Petition for others disposed.

Prem Nath Bhalla and Ors. Vs State… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Punjab & Haryana HC (2012)

¶1

CWP No. 9089 of 1994

¶2

-1-

¶3

IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

CWP No. 9089 of 1994 Date of Decision: 06.01.2012

¶5

Sh. Prem Nath Bhalla & others

¶6

……… Petitioners

¶7

Versus

¶8

The State of Punjab & others

¶9

………… Respondents

¶10

CORAM : Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Narain Raina

¶11

Present : Mr.Varinder Pal Singh, Advocate for the petitioners.

¶12

Mr. R.S. Chauhan, DAG, Punjab for the respondents.

¶13

¶14

To be referred to the reporters or not? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the digest.

¶15

RAJIV NARAIN RAINA, J.

¶16

Shri R.S. Chauhan, learned DAG, Punjab informs the Court, on instructions from Principal, Punjab Govt. Dental College & Hospital, Amritsar that petitioner No. 9 has retired from service and has been paid all dues along with the retiral benefits.

¶17

In the short reply by way of affidavit filed by the Principal, Govt. Medical College, Amritsar, it has been stated in para 2 that the benefits of proficiency step up have been granted to the petitioners at Sr. No. 1 to 8 w.e.f. 1.1.1986 raising their pay from Rs. 1500/- to Rs. 1530/- per month according to the Government instructions contained in circular dated 20.9.1994 (R-1) and as per their eligibility. Consequently, it is submitted that the writ petition has become infructuous qua petitioners No. 1 to 8. It is indeed true that writ petition has become infructuous qua petitioners No. 1 to 8.

¶18

Since the position with regard to petitioner No. 9 is not clear, I direct the respondents to examine her case and pass appropriate orders in terms of the affidavit dated 12.10.2011 and the Government instructions dated 20.9.1994 (R1). Let it be done within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a

¶19

CWP No. 9089 of 1994

¶20

-2-

¶21

certified copy of the order and the dues, be made over to petitioner No. 9 within a further period of one month.

¶22

The petition stands disposed of.

¶23

(RAJIV NARAIN RAINA) JUDGE

¶24

06.01.2012

¶25

'sp'

Prem Nath Bhalla and Ors. v. State of Punjab and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prem Nath Bhalla and Ors. v. State of Punjab and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jag Parvesh Vs State of Haryana & Anr.

B.S.Rai Vs Raghbir Singh Sandhu etc.

Baljinder Singh Hundal Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Ram Chander Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

Roop Chand Vs State of Haryana

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