Disposed

Roshan Lal v. Haryana Vidyut Prasaran Nigam and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC23 Jan 2023CWP/18138/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition for pension refixation regarding daily wage service, the High Court noted that benefits had already been paid. It disposed of the petition but allowed the petitioner to approach the competent authority regarding delayed payment interest.

What did the court decide?

The petition was disposed of; petitioner granted liberty to move a representation to the competent authority for delayed interest within three months.

Roshan Lal Vs Haryana Vidyut… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Punjab & Haryana HC (2023)

CWP-18138-2020

�

227

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶5

CWP No.18138 of 2020 Date of Decision: 23.01.2023

¶6

ROSHAN LAL

¶7

......Petitioner

¶8

Vs HARYANA VIDYUT PRASARAN NIGAM AND ORS

¶9

.....Respondents

¶10

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJ MOHAN SINGH

¶11

Present:Mr. Shevetanshu Goel, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶12

Ms. Sunita Punia, Advocate for Mr. Sidharth Sanwaria, Advocate for the respondents. ****

¶13

RAJ MOHAN SINGH, J.(Oral)

¶14

The petitioner has preferred this writ petition for the issuance of an appropriate writ in the nature of mandamus, directing the respondents to count the daily wage service of the petitioner from July 1980 to 22.06.1993 towards total length of service as qualifying service for the purpose of pension and pensionary/retiral benefits. The petitioner has also prayed for refixation of pension and other pensionary benefits as per their entitlement with arrears along with interest.

¶15

As per short reply filed by the respondents No.1 to 3,

¶16

MOHMED ATIK 2023.01.25 17:16 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment

¶17

CWP-18138-2020 �

¶18

the benefits of daily wage service w.e.f. 01.12.1980 to 22.06.1993 has already been paid to the petitioner. Upon making calculations, an amount of Rs.1,64,245/- has been paid through cheque No.737841 dated 11.03.2022.

¶19

The aforesaid stand of the respondents No.1 to 3 has been accepted by learned counsel for the petitioner, however with a rider that the petitioner is also entitled to interest for the delayed payment.

¶20

In view of above, this writ petition is disposed of, however with a liberty to the petitioner that in case, he is still aggrieved on account of non-payment of interest towards delayed payment, he may move a comprehensive representation to the competent authority. On receipt of the such representation, the competent authority shall proceed to decide the same in accordance with law, preferably within a period of three months from the date of receipt of such representation.

¶21

(RAJ MOHAN SINGH) January 23 , 2023 JUDGE Atik Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No

¶22

MOHMED ATIK 2023.01.25 17:16 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment

Roshan Lal v. Haryana Vidyut Prasaran Nigam and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Roshan Lal v. Haryana Vidyut Prasaran Nigam and Ors.

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

Basir Ahmad Vs Uhbvnl and Others

Ajit Vs State of Haryana and Others

Naveen Rao Vs Central Bureau of Investigation Acb Chandigarh

Santosh Devi Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

Dinesh Kaushik Vs Cholamandlam Investment and Finance Limited

Joginder Singh @ Bittu Vs State of Punjab