Dismissed

Harcharan Singh and Ors. v. State of Punjab and Others

Punjab & Haryana HC1 Jun 2022CWP/4816/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Single Judge disposed of the writ petition as infructuous because the respondents affirmed that the disputed contributory provident fund and interest have already been deposited in the petitioners' bank accounts. The Court dismissed the petition, leaving it open for the parties to revive the matter if any claim remains.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of as infructuous; claim for refund treated as satisfied by respondents.

Harcharan Singh and Ors. Vs State… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Punjab & Haryana HC (2022)

¶1

-1-

¶2

CWP No.4816 of 2021 (O&M)

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

CWP No.4816 of 2021 (O&M) Date of Decision.01.06.2022

¶5

Harcharan Singh and others

¶6

...Petitioners

¶7

¶8

State of Punjab and others

¶9

...Respondents

¶10

CORAM:HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JAISHREE THAKUR

¶11

Present: None for the petitioners.

¶12

Mr. Pawan Sharda, Sr. DAG, Punjab.

¶13

-.-

¶14

JAISHREE THAKUR J. (ORAL)

¶15

This is a writ petition that has been filed seeking an appropriate writ, order or direction including a writ in the nature of mandamus, directing the respondents to release the amount as deposited by the petitioners towards Contributory Provident Fund along with interest accrued thereon.

¶16

In brief, the facts are that the petitioners were initially appointed as temporary Special Police Officers in the year 1991-1994 and were subsequently absorbed on the post of Constable on different dates between the year 2005-2011. The respondent-State had issued a notification on 02.03.2004 by which service rules were amended to the effect that employees, who are appointed after the date of notification, would not be entitled to pension and new Contributory Pension Scheme was made applicable to all recruits w.e.f. 01.01.2004. As the petitioners would now be covered under the Old Pension Scheme, they sought refund of their contribution made under the New Contributory Pension Scheme. Since the said refund was not made to the petitioners, they approached this Court.

¶17

PANKAJ KUMAR 2022.06.02 12:21 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

¶18

-2-

¶19

CWP No.4816 of 2021 (O&M)

¶20

Pursuant to notice of motion order, reply has been filed by way of affidavit of Jaswinderpal Singh, PPS, Dy. Supdt. of Police/Adjutant, 5^th I.R. Bn., Amritsar on behalf of respondents No.1 to 4. As per the affidavit dated 19.08.2021, the contributory provident fund as claimed by the petitioners stand deposited in their bank accounts.

¶21

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent-State would submit that the necessary relief has been allowed to the petitioners and therefore, nothing survives in the instant petition.

¶22

In view of the reply filed by the respondents, this writ petition stands disposed of as having been rendered infructuous, leaving it open to the petitioners to re-agitate any claim that still survives by approaching this Court for revival of the writ petition.

¶23

(JAISHREE THAKUR) JUDGE June 01, 2022 Pankaj* Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No

¶24

PANKAJ KUMAR 2022.06.02 12:21 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

Harcharan Singh and Ors. v. State of Punjab and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Harcharan Singh and Ors. v. State of Punjab and Others

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

Rahul Vs State of Haryana

M/S Guru Nanak Agro Products Vs Union of India and Others

Jiwan Singh and Others Vs State of Punjab and Others

Rohit Vs State of Haryana

Pooja Yadav Vs State of Haryana and Another

Gurpreet Singh Vs State of Punjab and Another