Partly allowed

Narinder Singh v. State of Punjab and Anr.

Punjab & Haryana HC28 Aug 2018CWP/21045/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought writ under Article 226 for release of retiral benefits. Court, without deciding merits, directed Accountant General to decide pending representation within two months, leaving respondent to pass reasoned order upon which petitioner can approach court.

What did the court decide?

The Court directed the Accountant General, General Punjab, Chandigarh to look into the grievances unfolded by the petitioner in representation dated 25.05.2018 and decide the same within two months fr

Narinder Singh Vs State of Punjab… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Punjab & Haryana HC (2018)

¶1

CWP No.21045 OF 2018

¶2

--1--

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

CWP No.21045 OF 2018 DECIDED ON: AUGUST 28, 2018

¶5

NARINDER SINGH

¶6

.....PETITIONER..

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANR.

¶9

.....RESPONDENTS..

¶10

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASPAL SINGH

¶11

Present: Mr. Aminder Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner.

¶12

¶13

JASPAL SINGH, J

¶14

Through instant petition preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, petitioner has sought issuance of a writ especially in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to release the retiral/service benefits like gratuity, leave encashment, commutation etc.

¶15

At the very outset, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though representation dated 25.05.2018 (P-2) was moved to the respondent(s) but till date neither any response has been received nor any conscious decision has been taken. He further submits that petitioner feels satisfied in case direction is issued to respondent No.2 to decide aforesaid representation (P-2), within a stipulated period.

¶16

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, instant petition is disposed of with the direction to respondent No.2-Accountant

¶17

SONIKA 2018.08.30 15:29 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

¶18

--2--

¶19

CWP No.21045 OF 2018

¶20

General Punjab, Punjab Building, Sector 17-E, Chandigarh to look into the grievances unfolded by the petitioner in representation (P-2) and to decide the same, in accordance with law, rules and instructions, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.

¶21

However, if the petitioner still feels aggrieved against any of the order passed by the concerned authority, he shall be at liberty to approach this Court as well as to have recourse to the other remedies available under law.

¶22

AUGUST 28, 2018 (JASPAL SINGH) sonika JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes Whether reportable Yes/No

¶23

SONIKA 2018.08.30 15:29 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

Narinder Singh v. State of Punjab and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Narinder Singh v. State of Punjab and Anr.

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

Vishambhar Singh Negi Vs Union of India and Ors.

Kashmir Singh Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Laxmi Devi Vs State of Punjab and Others

Ashok Kumar Gaind and Ors. Vs Hvpnl and Ors.

Parkash Kaur & Others Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Jaspal Rai Retd Professor & Ors. Vs State of Punjab & Ors.