Dismissed

Karar Hussain v. State of Haryana and Others

Punjab & Haryana HC25 Jan 2024CWP/1701/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition concerning delayed pension grant. The court directed the State to decide the petitioner's representation within eight weeks and, if entitled, extend the benefits within a further four weeks.

What did the court decide?

Respondents to decide the representation within eight weeks; if petitioner is entitled, extend benefits within a further four weeks.

Karar Hussain Vs State of Haryana… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Punjab & Haryana HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No.2024:PHHC:010355

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶3

110

¶4

CWP-1701-2024 (O&M) Decided on : 25.01.2024

¶5

Karar Hussain . . .Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State of Haryana and others

¶8

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI

¶9

PRESENT: Mr. Sukhdip Singh Brar, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶10

Mr. Harish Nain, AAG, Haryana.

¶11

**** HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI , J. (Oral)

¶12

In the present petition, the grievance of the petitioner is that despite the fact that the petitioner has already retired from the service on 31.10.2007, but, the petitioner has not been granted the pensionary benefits immediately within the period of 02 months of retirement, which action on the part of the respondents is causing prejudice to the petitioner.

¶13

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that keeping in view the settled principle of law settled by the Full Bench of this Court in A.S. Randhawa Vs. State of Punjab and others, 1997(3) SCT 468, wherein, it has been held that in case an employee has not been paid his/her retiral benefits within a period of two months from the date of his/her retirement, in case there is no impediment in the release of the same, an employee will be entitled for the grant of interest on the said delayed payments hence, the respondents are under obligation to release the pensionary benefits including the interest, if any to the petitioner, so that the petitioner does not suffer any prejudice.

¶14

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though the petitioner has already raised the said grievance in two representations dated 01.08.2022 (Annexure P-2) & 20.02.2023 (Annexure P-3) but the petitioner

¶15

RIYA 2024.01.25 16:58 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶16

CWP-1701-2024 (O&M) -22024:PHHC:010355

¶17

intends to move a detailed representation to claim the same benefits as being claimed in the present petition and the petitioner will be satisfied, at this stage, in case a direction is issued to the respondents to decide the same by passing an appropriate speaking order in a time bound manner.

¶18

Notice of motion.

¶19

Mr. Harish Nain, AAG, Haryana, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents-State and submits that in case, any such representation claiming the pensionary benefits is received by the authorities concerned, the same will be decided by the competent authority within a period of eight weeks of the receipt of certified copy of this order by passing an appropriate speaking order and in case, after the decision, the petitioner is found entitled for any benefit including interest, the same will be extended to him within a further period of four weeks .

¶20

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that keeping in view the statement of learned State counsel, the present petition may kindly be disposed of having been not pressed any further with liberty to file a representation with respondents so as to raise all the claims as raised in the present petition.

¶21

Ordered accordingly.

¶22

(HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI) JUDGE

¶23

25.01.2024 Riya

¶24

Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes /No Whether Reportable: Yes /No

¶25

RIYA 2024.01.25 16:58 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Karar Hussain v. State of Haryana and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Karar Hussain v. State of Haryana and Others

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

Anamika Gupta Vs State of Haryana and Others

Pankaj Kumar Vs State of Haryana and Others

Mohd. Yasar Luqman Vs State of Haryana and Others

Raman Kumar Vs Sumit Kumar and Ors.

Ravi Vs State of Haryana and Others

Raj Kumar and Ors. Vs State of Haryana and Another