Disposed¶22

Pappu Ram v. State of Punjab and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC22 Jan 2025CWP/1635/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

CWP-1635-2025; Pappu Ram v. State of Punjab and Others; High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh; Justice Deepak Gupta; decided 22.01.2025; retirement/retiral dues; Safai Sewak; Municipal Council Jalalabad, District Fazilka; provident fund; gratuity; leave encashment allowance; interest on delayed payment; ₹3,70,310/-; Article 226/227 Constitution of India; writ of mandamus; representation dated 19.08.2024 Annexure P-3; speaking order within two months; disposed without examining merits.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the respondents to consider the representation dated 19.08.2024 (Annexure P-3) in accordance with law and pass a speaking order within two months from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order; no adjudication on merits. ¶22

Pappu Ram Vs State of Punjab and Ors. — Writ and Judicial Review | Punjab & Haryana HC (2025)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

********

¶3

137

¶4

CWP-1635-2025 Date of Decision.:22.01.2025

¶5

Pappu Ram Pe,,oner

¶6

Vs.

¶7

State of Punjab and Others Respondents

¶8

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK GUPTA

¶9

Present: Mr. Peeush Gagneja, Advocate for the pe��oner.

¶10

¶11

DEEPAK GUPTA, J. (ORAL)

¶12

By of way of this pe��on filed under Ar�cle 226/227 of the Cons�tu�on of India, pe��oner prays for issuance of a writ of mandamus direc�ng the respondents authori�es to release the remaining amount of service-cum-re�rement dues of the pe��oner such as Provident Fund, Gratuity, Leave Encashment Allowance and all other consequen�al benefits along with interest on delayed period.

¶13

It is contended by learned counsel for the pe��oner that pe��oner was reitred as Safai Sewak on 30.06.2024 from Municipal Council Jalalabad, District Fazilka. He made representa�on as well as sent legal no�ces to pay him gratuity, leave encashment and another benefits. However, the said re�ral benefits have not been released �ll date. It is further contended that amount of ₹3,70,310/- is also due to be deposited by respondent No.3 w.e.f. 01.07.2022 to 30.06.2024.

¶14

At this stage, learned counsel for the pe��oner submits that he will be sa�sfied if his representa�on dated 19.08.2024 (Annexure P-3) is considered and decided by passing a speaking order in the �me bound manner.

¶15

No�ce of mo�on.

¶16

NEETIKA TUTEJA 2025.01.22 18:20 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶17

CWP-1635-2025

¶18

-2-

¶19

Mr. Rajesh Sehgal, Addi�onal AG, Punjab accepts no�ce on behalf of the respondents and submits that he has no objec�on to the innocuous prayer made by learned counsel for the pe��oner.

¶20

I have heard learned counsel for the par�es and have gone through the record of the case.

¶21

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case or the claim being made by the pe��oner in the present pe��on, respondents are directed to consider the grievances put forth by the pe��oner in representa�on dated 19.08.2024 (Annexure P-3), in accordance with law, by passing a speaking order within a period of two months from the date of receipt of cer�fied copy of this order.

¶22

The pe��on stands disposed of.

¶23

( DEEPAK GUPTA ) JUDGE

¶24

January 22, 2025

¶25

Nee�ka Tuteja

¶26

Whether Speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No

¶27

NEETIKA TUTEJA 2025.01.22 18:20 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Pappu Ram v. State of Punjab and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pappu Ram v. State of Punjab and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ram Das etc. Vs Baba Chetna Nand Giri etc.

Ram Dass Vs Smadh Baba Tirath Gir

Deepak Jyoti Vs P.S.T.C. and or.

Warjinder Singh Vs Punjab State Power Corporation Limited and Others

Rajesh Kumar and Others Vs State of Punjab and Others

Ram Nath Vs Ajit Singh