Disposed

Asha Bedi v. State of Punjab and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC15 May 2013CWP/10387/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a public service employee petition seeking to re-exercise the option for revised pay scales. The court directed the respondent authority to consider the petitioner's representation and pass a speaking order within four months, referencing a coordinate bench judgment.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondent No.4 to consider the petitioner's representation and decide the matter by passing a speaking order within four months.

Asha Bedi Vs State of Punjab and Ors. — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Punjab & Haryana HC (2013)

¶1

Civil Writ Petition No.10387 of 2013 { 1 }

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶3

Date of Decision: May 15, 2013

Asha Bedi

--Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab & others

¶8

--Respondents

¶9

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH

¶10

Present:- Mr.R.K.Arora, Advocate, for the petitioner.

¶11

¶12

AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH, J.(ORAL)

¶13

The petitioner, who has superannuated and served in the State of Punjab, Education Department as JBT Teacher, has filed the instant writ petition seeking a writ in the nature of Mandamus for issuing directions to the respondents to permit her to re-exercise her option and as such for the grant of revised pay scales w.e.f. 1.1.1992 in terms of the Notification/Circular dated 24.12.1992 (Annexure P-1) instead of 1.1.1986.

¶14

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the claim as raised in the present writ petition would be covered in terms of the judgment passed by a Coordinate Bench of this Court dated 25.2.2010 rendered in CWP No. 7464 of 2009 titled as Surinder

¶15

Kumar & others Vs. State of Punjab & others (Annexure P-4).

¶16

Counsel further submits that a representation dated

¶17

Civil Writ Petition No.10387 of 2013 { 2 }

¶18

02.10.2012 (Annexure P-7) already stands submitted to respondent No.4.

¶19

In the light of the averments made in the petition, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the present petition with direction to respondent No.4 to consider the claim of the petitioner and decide the representation dated 02.10.2012 (Annexure P-7) strictly in accordance with law and by passing a speaking order within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. While taking such decision, the authorities shall bear in mind the decision of this Court rendered in Surinder Kumar's case (supra). It is further clarified that in the eventuality of the petitioner being found entitled to the same relief and is permitted to re-exercise her option in terms of the Circular dated 24.12.1992, no resultant arrears of pay shall be paid to her and she shall be entitled to only the notional pay fixation w.e.f. 1.1.1986, 1.1.1996 and 1.1.2006 as the case may be. The petitioner, however, would be paid re-fixed pensionary/retiral benefits on the basis of such notional pay fixation.

¶20

Petition disposed of.

¶21

(AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH) JUDGE

¶22

May 15, 2013 ramesh

Asha Bedi v. State of Punjab and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Asha Bedi 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

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Darshan Pal & Ors. Vs State of Punjab & Ors.

Satya Pal Vs State of Punjab and Others

Gurdas Ram Vs State of Punjab & Ors.

Darshan Singh and Ors. Vs State of Punjab and Anr.

Pritam Singh Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Darshpreet Singh Dhillon Vs State of Punjab and Ors.