Tijan Devi vs State Of Haryana And Others
2022 Latest Caselaw 1719 P&H

CWP-5361-2022                                                             -1-
129
      IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA
                  AT CHANDIGARH
                                         ****

CWP-5361-2022 Date of Decision: 16.03.2022

Tijan Devi ..... Petitioner Versus

State of Haryana and others ..... Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI

Present: Mr. S.K. Malik, Advocate, for the petitioner.

(Through Video Conference)

*****

HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI J. (ORAL)

Learned counsel for the petitioner argues that in the present

case, prayer of the petitioner is that she was continuously working with the

respondent-Department, since 30.04.1990 up to the date when she retired,

i.e. on 05.07.2014. Learned counsel submits that the petitioner's services

were regularized by the respondent-Department on 01.07.2006 and keeping

in view the said aspect, the petitioner is not being granted the benefits of old

Pension Scheme on the ground that after 01.01.2004, new Contributory

Provident Fund Scheme has been invoked, and the said action of the

respondent-Department is contradictory to the settled principle of law as

laid down by the Division Bench of this Court while passing judgment in

CWP-2371-2010, titled as "Harbans Lal Vs. The State of Punjab and

others", decided on 31.08.2010, which has already attained finality,

therefore, the petitioner is entitled for the benefits under the old Pension 1 of 3

Scheme. Learned counsel for the petitioner also submits that further

grievance of the petitioner is that after services of the petitioner were

regularized, even the regular salary was not being paid to her, which action

is totally arbitrary and illegal.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the said

grievances have already been raised by the petitioner before the competent

Authority in the form of a legal notice dated 16.11.2021 (Annexure P-11)

but the same is still pending consideration with the Authority concerned

which is causing prejudice to her.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner

will be satisfied at this stage, in case a time bound direction is given to the

respondents to decide the said legal notice dated 16.11.2021 (Annexure P-

11) by passing an appropriate speaking order.

Notice of motion.

Mr. Raman Kumar Sharma, Additional A.G., Haryana, keeping

in view the advance service of copy of the petition, accepts notice on behalf

of the State and raises no objection, in case prayer made hereinbefore on

behalf of the petitioner for deciding the legal notice dated 16.11.2021

(Annexure P-11) in a time bound manner is accepted.

Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of this case and

without going into merits of the present case as well as the said legal notice

dated 16.11.2021, this petition is disposed of with a direction to the

respondents to pass an appropriate speaking order on the legal notice dated

16.11.2021 (Annexure P-11), filed by the petitioner, within a period of eight

weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of this order. In case, the

petitioner is found entitled for the relief, the same be also released in her

2 of 3

favour within a period of next four weeks of passing of the said order on her

legal notice dated 16.11.2021 (Annexure P-11).

16.03.2022                               (HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI)
Apurva                                           JUDGE


             1. Whether speaking/reasoned :           Yes

             2. Whether reportable             :      No




                                3 of 3