Disposed

Prem Kumar Bhanot v. State of Punjab and Others

Punjab & Haryana HC18 May 2024CWP/2930/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought release of his General Provident Fund after resignation accepted in 1991. Court directed respondents to release GPF within two months of petitioner furnishing account number, with 6% per annum interest from date of his representation.

What did the court decide?

Release of GPF within two months of furnishing account number, with interest at 6% per annum from date of representation till release.

Prem Kumar Bhanot Vs State of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Punjab & Haryana HC (2024)

¶1

CWP-2930-2021 (O&M)

¶2

-1-

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

203

¶5

CWP-2930-2021 (O&M) Date of Decision:18.05.2024

¶6

Dr. Prem Kumar Bhanot

¶7

...Petitioner

¶8

Versus

¶9

State of Punjab and others

¶10

...Respondents

¶11

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE AMAN CHAUDHARY

¶12

¶13

Present: Mr. Puneet Gupta, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶14

Mr. Manipal Singh Atwal, DAG, Punjab Assisted by Mr. Arvind Kumar, Senior Assistant, Department of Ayurveda,

¶15

Ms. Swati Dayalan, Advocate for respondent No.3.

¶16

¶17

AMAN CHAUDHARY J. (Oral)

¶18

The prayer in the present petition is for directing the respondents to release the benefit of General Provident Fund.

¶19

Learned counsel submits that the resignation of the petitioner, who was initially appointed as an Ayurvedic Vaidya, was accepted on 13.03.1991. However, the GPF amount of Rs. 19,329/-, having not been paid, a representation was submitted by him on 15.05.2018, Annexure P-3, to which learned State counsel submits that the petitioner has himself delayed the matter and not even given the account number required for disbursing the amount. Faced with this, learned counsel on instructions from the petitioner, undertook to furnish the same

¶20

DINESH 2024.05.21 02:36 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶21

CWP-2930-2021 (O&M)

¶22

-2-

¶23

within a week and restricted his prayer for grant of interest with effect from the date of his representation.

¶24

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and in light of the judgments in A.S. Randhawa vs. State of Punjab and others, 1997(3) SCT 468 and J.S. Cheema vs. State of Haryana , 2014(13) RCR (Civil) 355, the present petition is disposed of by directing the respondents to release the benefit of GPF within two months from when the petitioner furnishes his account number alongwith interest at the rate of 6% per annum, payable from the date of his representation, till its release, as per the statement made.

¶25

(AMAN CHAUDHARY) JUDGE

¶26

May 18, 2024 dinesh Whether speaking : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No

¶27

DINESH 2024.05.21 02:36 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Prem Kumar Bhanot v. State of Punjab and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prem Kumar Bhanot 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

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sandeep Kansal Vs State of Punjab and Others

Subhash Arora etc. Vs State of Pb.Etc.

Pargan Lal Vs State of Punjab and Others

Harish Kumar Bedi Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Charn Singh &Other Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Sukhwinder Pal and Others Vs State of Punjab and Others