Ranbir Singh Dhillon vs The State Of Punjab And Others

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Ranbir Singh Dhillon vs The State Of Punjab And Others on 9 May, 2024

                                     Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:064994




CWP-10705 of 2024


       IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
                      CHANDIGARH

118                                      CWP-10705 of 2024
                                         Date of Decision:09.05.2024
Ranbir Singh Dhillon
                                                                   ....Petitioner
                                     Versus

The State of Punjab and others

                                                               .....Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMAN CHAUDHARY
             ****

Present:     Mr. Mukesh Arora, Advocate,
             for the petitioner.

       ****
AMAN CHAUDHARY J. (Oral)

1. The present petition has been filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directintg the respondents for counting the service of the petitioner.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the period from 06.10.1989 to 31.07.1990 rendered in the Industrial Department and from 18.11.1992 to 03.02.1994 in the Department of Finance (Treasury and Accounts), Punjab has been treated for pay protection however not for pension and retiral benefits but has to be treated for pension and retiral benefits also in view of the Policy/Instructions dated 20.05.1982 and dated 14.05.1986, Annexure P-1 and P-2 respectively and legal notice dated 10.11.2023, Annexure P-7, has been served but has yet not evoked any 1 of 2 ::: Downloaded on - 11-05-2024 12:15:48 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:064994 CWP-10705 of 2024 response. He relies upon a Division Bench judgment of this Court passed in CWP-2582 of 2004, titled Baldev Singh Dahliwal vs. Union of India and others, decided on 30.10.2008. He on instructions, submits that the petitioner would be satisfied if his legal notice dated 10.11.2023, Annexure P-7, is directed to be decided in a time bound manner.

3. Notice of motion.

4. Mr. Amarpreet Singh Bains, AAG, Punjab accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State and has no objection to the limited prayer made.

5. In view of the above and without commenting on the merits of the case, this petition is hereby disposed of with a direction to the respondents to decide the legal notice dated 10.11.2023, Annexure P-7 in light of the afore-referred judgment, within a period of 6 months, which this Court has no reason to believe the authorities would not address in a just, fair and reasonable manner. Upon doing so, after notice and hearing offered to them and if found entitled, grant the benefit forthwith. Needless to say, if the orders are adverse to their interest, the same shall contain reasons and the petitioners shall be free to seek legal redress thereupon.

                                               (AMAN CHAUDHARY)
                                                   JUDGE
May 09, 2024
dinesh             Whether speaking                  :         Yes/No
                   Whether reportable                :         Yes/No




                                    2 of 2
                 ::: Downloaded on - 11-05-2024 12:15:49 :::