Disposed

Urmila Rao v. State of Haryana and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC12 Dec 2013LPA/2063/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this Letters Patent Appeal, the appellant challenged the Single Judge's order granting pension benefits but excluded salary arrears prior to 1.4.1992. The Court observed the relief was not specifically prayed for in the writ petition, ordered the appellant to represent the authorities for unresolved claims within six months, and disposed of the appeal.

What did the court decide?

Appellant directed to represent Competent Authority for claims within six months; appeal disposed of.

Urmila Rao Vs State of Haryana and… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Punjab & Haryana HC (2013)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

Letters Patent Appeal No.2063 of 2013(O&M) Date of Decision: December 12, 2013

Dr.(Ms.) Urmila Rao

.....Appellant

versus

State of Haryana and others

¶7

.....Respondents

¶8

CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT.

¶9

HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURINDER GUPTA.

¶10

Present : Mr.Mukesh Kumar Verma, Advocate, for the appellant.

¶11

-.-

¶12

Whether Reporters of Local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

¶13

To be referred to the Reporters or not?

¶14

Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?

¶15

¶16

Surya Kant, J. (Oral)

¶17

This letters patent appeal seeks modification of the order dated 8.8.2013 passed by learned Single Judge accepting the claim of the appellant and proforma-respondent Nos.5 to 14 for the release of grant-in-aid w.e.f. 1.4.1992 alongwith arrears after taking into consideration the respective number of annual increments already earned by them prior to 1.4.1992. The learned Single Judge has further directed that if any other service benefit including re-fixation of salary accrues in favour of the appellant or her co-petitioners, they shall be granted the same alongwith arrears, if any.

¶18

The appellant now seeks modification of the above-stated order as, according to her, the learned Single Judge has not granted arrears of salary prior to 1.4.1992, i.e., from December, 1989 onwards.

¶19

Having heard learned counsel for the appellant it appears to us that the above-stated relief was not specifically

¶20

Kumar Mohinder 2014.01.09 16:44 I attest to the accuracy of this order Chandigarh

¶21

LPA No.2063 of 2013 (O&M) [2]

¶22

prayed for on behalf of the writ-petitiones before the learned Single Judge. Suffice it would be to observe that if as a consequence to the directions issued by the learned Single Judge the appellant is entitled to the above-mentioned relief, she may represent the Competent Authority, namely, the State Government as well as the Managing Committee of the College who shall then consider and decide such claim in accordance with law/rules/Government policy within a period of six months from the date of receiving such a representation.

¶23

The appeal stands disposed of accordingly.

¶24

[SURYA KANT] JUDGE

¶25

December 12, 2013 [SURINDER GUPTA] Mohinder JUDGE

¶26

Kumar Mohinder 2014.01.09 16:44 I attest to the accuracy of this order Chandigarh

Urmila Rao v. State of Haryana and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Urmila Rao v. State of Haryana 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

Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. and Ors. Vs Dharambir and Ors.

Chandigarh Administration Vs Jagdish Chander and Ors.

Jagtar Singh and Others Vs State of Punjab etc.

Dalbir Singh Vs Punjab Mandi Baord and Ors.

Dariya Singh Vs State of Haryana & Ors.

Vijay Kumar Vs State of Haryana and Ors.