Disposed

UOI v. Bharat Sarkar Mudranalya Karamchari & or

Punjab & Haryana HC25 Mar 2014CWP/7654/2007

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition challenging an Office Memorandum on Transport Allowance. It directed that no recovery be made of benefits already paid to private respondents, allowing them to rely on the rates effective until the end of March 2014 as they assailed the order.

What did the court decide?

No recovery of benefits already paid; respondents may receive benefits till March end 2014; liberty to assail the Office Memorandum.

UOI Vs Bharat Sarkar Mudranalya… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Punjab & Haryana HC (2014)

¶1

C. W. P. No. 7654-CAT of 2007

¶2

¶3

Sr. No. 429

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

¶5

Case No. : C. W. P. No. 7654-CAT of 2007 Date of Decision : March 25, 2014

¶6

Union of India .... Petitioner

¶7

vs.

¶8

Bharat Sarkar Mudranalya Karamchari Sangh (Regd.), Faridabad and others .... Respondents

¶9

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KISHAN KAUL, CHIEF JUSTICE. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN PALLI.

¶10

¶11

Present : Mr. Gurpreet Singh, Senior Panel Counsel for the petitioner – Union of India.

¶12

Mr. K. B. Sharma, Advocate for respondent no. 1.

¶13

¶14

SANJAY KISHAN KAUL, C. J. (Oral) :

¶15

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a fresh Office Memorandum has been passed on 07.03.2014 in respect of payment of Transport Allowance to Central Government Employees posted in the offices located at Faridabad, Ghaziabad, Gurgaon and Noida. This Office Memorandum is stated to be in pursuance to directions issued by the

¶16

Monika 2014.03.26 11:11 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh

¶17

C. W. P. No. 7654-CAT of 2007

¶18

¶19

Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi in O. A. No. 2080 of 2012 titled M. L. Rustagi vs. Union of India and others and 22 connected matters , on 04.10.2013. The detailed Office Memorandum revisits the issue, but concludes that the Transport Allowance qua Central Government Employees posted in the offices located in these places would be regulated as per rates applicable to `Other Places' in terms of Ministry of Finance Office Memorandum dated 29.08.2008.

¶20

The result of the aforesaid is that this Office Memorandum would stand in the way of private respondents for future and thus, we are of the view that it would be appropriate to dispose of the present petition with the following directions :-

¶21

(i) The operation of the impugned order, not having been stayed and the benefits having enured for the benefit of the private respondents, some of whom have even retired, no recovery would be made of benefits already paid ;

¶22

(ii) The respondents are at liberty to assail the Office Memorandum dated 07.03.2014, in accordance with law and it would be for the competent Forum to pass the appropriate directions. The benefits would thus enure till the end of March 2014 to the private respondents, subject to any orders, which may be passed by the appropriate Forum for the period

¶23

Monika 2014.03.26 11:11 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh

¶24

C. W. P. No. 7654-CAT of 2007

¶25

¶26

thereafter.

¶27

The petition accordingly stands disposed of.

¶28

( SANJAY KISHAN KAUL ) CHIEF JUSTICE

¶29

March 25, 2014

¶30

monika

¶31

( ARUN PALLI ) JUDGE

¶32

Monika 2014.03.26 11:11 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh

UOI v. Bharat Sarkar Mudranalya Karamchari & or

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

UOI v. Bharat Sarkar Mudranalya Karamchari & or

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

Niilm University Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

Dinesh Chadha Vs Union of India and Ors.

Vijay Bansal Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

Retail Sale Chemist Association Vs State of Punjab & Ors.

Baljinder Singh and Another Vs State of Punjab and Others

Gian Chand Vs State of Haryana etc.