Court disposed of a miscellaneous petition concerning revised family pension. Petitioner granted liberty to revive the petition if payment remains pending despite respondent counsel submission.
Liberty to petitioner to get the petition revived in case payment has not been made.
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.
COCP No.260 of 2013
-1-
IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH
COCP No.260 of 2013 (O&M) Date of Decision : 25.3.2013
Dev Brat Sharma
..Petitioner.
Vs.
Mandeep Singh Sandhu and others
..Respondents.
CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL
Present: Mr. Animesh Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. V. Ramswaroop, Addl.AG Punjab for respondents No.1 and 2.
Mr. I.S. Sidhu, Advocate for respondent No.3.
RAJESH BINDAL, J.
In response to the notice issued, short reply by way of affidavit of Mandeep Singh Sandhu, Financial Commissioner-cumSecretary, Rural Development and Panchayats Department, Punjab respondent No.1 filed in Court, is taken on record.
Learned counsel for respondents No.1 and 2, on instructions from Renu Bala, Superintendent, RDE Branch, submitted that in terms of the order passed by the competent authority on March 7, 2013 regarding the sanction of the revised family pension to the petitioner even the payment has also been made.
In view of the aforesaid stand taken by the learned counsel for the respondents No.1 and 2, the present petition is
COCP No.260 of 2013
-2-
disposed of, however, with liberty to the petitioner to get the same revived in case the payment has not been made.
( Rajesh Bindal ) Judge
25.3.2013 Meenu
Dev Brat Sharma
Mandeep Singh Sandhu
Renu Bala
RAJESH BINDAL
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
