Disposed

Avtar Singh and Ors. v. State of Punjab and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC21 Dec 2017CWP/29484/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A civil writ petition for mandamus seeking directives from the State of Punjab to pay delayed retirement benefits, gratuity, and provident fund along with interest due to retired petitioners. The court directed authorities to decide grievances within three months and consider the interest claim citing a Full Bench precedent.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondent authorities to decide petitioners' grievances within three months and consider claim for interest on delayed payment.

Avtar Singh and Ors. Vs State of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Punjab & Haryana HC (2017)

¶1

CWP No. 29484 OF 2017

¶2

--1--

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

CWP No. 29484 OF 2017 DECIDED ON: DECEMBER 21, 2017

¶5

AVTAR SINGH AND OTHERS

¶6

.....PETITIONERS

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS

¶9

.....RESPONDENTS

¶10

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASPAL SINGH

¶11

Present: Mr. Karambir Singh Kahlon, Advocate, for the petitioners.

¶12

¶13

JASPAL SINGH, J (ORAL)

¶14

By virtue of instant petition preferred under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India, petitioners have sought issuance of a writ in the nature mandamus, directing the respondent to pay GPF to petitioners No.1 and 2, to pay gratuity, general provident fund and funds of group insurance scheme to petitioners No.3 and 4 and further to direct the respondent to pay GPF, leave encashment, gratuity and funds of group insurance scheme of petitioner No.5, along with interest to the tune of 18% per annum along with all other consequential retiral benefits from the date of their retirements on account of delayed payment.

¶15

The contention of learned counsel for the petitioners is that petitioners No. 1 & 2 retired in the month of December 2015, petitioner No.3 & 4 retired in the year 2016 and petitioner No.5 retired in the year 2017, on Sonika attaining the age of their superannuation. Further at the time of their retirement 2017.12.22 17:07 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

¶16

CWP No. 29484 OF 2017

¶17

--2--

¶18

neither any judicial proceedings nor any departmental inquiry are pending against either of the petitioners but till date all the retiral benefits have not been released to the petitioners.

¶19

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that even representation dated 17.05.2017 (Annexure P-1) was also moved to the respondents but till date no conscious decision has been taken. He further submits that petitioners feel satisfied in case direction is issued to respondent(s) to decide aforesaid representation, within a stipulated period.

¶20

The instant petition is disposed of with the direction to respondent(s) to look into the grievances unfolded by the petitioners in their representation dated 17.05.2017 (Annexure P-1) and to decide the same, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.

¶21

As far as grant of interest on delayed payment is concerned that shall also be considered in view of the observations made by Full Bench of this Court in case captioned as “R.S. Randhawa vs. State of Punjab, 1997 (3) RSJ 318 as well as Punjab Govt. Instructions No.1/15/90IFPIII/4226, dated 10.05.1990.

¶22

However, if the petitioners still feel aggrieved against any of the order(s) passed by the concerned authority, they shall be at liberty to approach this Court.

¶23

DECEMBER 21, 2017 (JASPAL SINGH) sonika JUDGE

¶24

Whether speaking/reasoned Yes Whether reportable Yes/No

¶25

Sonika 2017.12.22 17:07 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

Avtar Singh and Ors. v. State of Punjab and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Avtar Singh and Ors. 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kissan Workers Co-Operative Labour & Const. Soc Ltd. Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Jagwant Kumar Sharma Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

M/S Competent Constructions Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Om Parkash Vs Union of India and Others

Sukhdev Singh Vs Punjab State Power Corporation Limited and Others

M/S Mittal Builders Vs State of Punjab and Ors.