Allowed

Yog Raj Madan v. Punjab State Power Corporation Limited and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC13 Dec 2017CWP/24896/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a writ petition by Yog Raj Madan, quashing an order that withdrew pension and pay scale benefits. The court issued a direction to refund the withdrawn amount with interest within three months, relying on precedent.

What did the court decide?

Judgment allows the petition, quashes the impugned order, and directs refund of withdrawn amount with interest at 9% per annum within three months.

Yog Raj Madan Vs Punjab State Power… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Punjab & Haryana HC (2017)

¶1

CWP No. 24896 OF 2015

¶2

--1--

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

CWP No. 24896 OF 2015 DECIDED ON: DECEMBER 13, 2017

¶5

YOG RAJ MADAN

¶6

.....PETITIONER..

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

PUNJAB STATE POWER CORP. AND OTHERS ....RESPONDENTS..

¶9

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASPAL SINGH

¶10

Present: Mr. A.K. Walia, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶11

Ms. Meena Bansal, Advocate, for the respondents.

¶12

¶13

JASPAL SINGH, J.

¶14

By virtue of instant petition preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, petitioner has sought issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing impugned office order No.527, dated 03.08.2015 (Annexure P-4) whereby benefit of 8 years proficiency step up in the year 1995 and also First Time Bound High Pay scale after completion of 9 years of service w.e.f. 10.12.1996 has been withdrawn, on account of foregoing promotion to Revenue Accountant. 2. At the very outset of the arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the case of the petitioner is squarely covered within the parameters laid down by this Court in CWP No. 2587 of 2009, titled as “Rattan

¶15

Sonika Chand v. PSEB”, decided on 12.08.2010 (Annexure P-6) and CWP No.10411 2018.02.01 15:23 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

¶16

CWP No. 24896 OF 2015

¶17

--2--

¶18

of 2012, titled as “Jarnail Singh v. The Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd. and others”, decided on 29.04.2014 (Annexure P-7).

¶19

Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant petition is allowed in terms of Rattan Chand's case (supra) (Annexure P-6) and Jarnail Singh's case (supra) (Annexure P-7) with the direction to the respondents to refund the amount so reduced/withdrawn from the petitioner along with interest @ `9% per annum from the date of withdrawal of the benefits, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.

¶20

However, in case of non-compliance of order of this Court, the petitioner shall be at liberty to approach this Court.

¶21

DECEMBER 13, 2017 sonika

¶22

(JASPAL SINGH) JUDGE

¶23

Whether speaking/reasoned Yes Whether reportable Yes/No

¶24

Sonika 2018.02.01 15:23 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

Yog Raj Madan v. Punjab State Power Corporation Limited and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Yog Raj Madan v. Punjab State Power Corporation Limited 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kulbir Singh Thakur Vs State of Punjab & Ors.

Kalu Ram Vs State of Haryana and Others

Irvinder Kumar Karkra Vs State of Punjab & Anr.

M/Sbharat Bhushan & Co. Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Channo Devi Vs D.G.M.- Dhbvn & Others

Bhani Devi Vs State of Haryana and Ors.