AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
16 paragraphs · 296 wordsJASPAL SINGH, J.
By virtue of instant petition preferred under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India, petitioners have sought issuance of a writ in the nature of
mandamus, directing the respondents to consider the claim for grant of advance promotional benefits after completion of 23 years service, which
was granted to one of their collegues Sukhdev Singh (Retd.JE) and others and further release the revised retiral benefits from the date it became
due along with interest @ 12% per annum.
At the very outset of the arguments, learned counsel for the petitioners submits petitioners feel satisfied in case direction is issued to respondent(s)
to decide representation dated 26.11.2017 (Annexure P-2), within a stipulated period.
Without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, instant petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No.1-Chairman, Punjab State
Power Corporation Ltd, The Mall, Patiala to look into the grievances unfolded by the petitioners in representation dated 26.11.2017 (Annexure P-2)
and to decide the same in the light of judgments passed by this Court in CWP No.8589 of 2016, decided on 05.06.2016, CWP No. 20139 of 2015,
decided on 29.02.2016, CWP No. 2457 of 2018, decided on 05.02.2018 and CWP No. 5812 of 2018, decided on 09.03.2018, within a period of three
months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.
However, qua petitioners No.1, 2 and 7 only, relief shall stand restricted to 38 months in view of Full Bench judgment of this Court in “Saroj
Kumari v. State of Punjab and othersâ€, 1998(3) SCT 664.
However, if the petitioners still feels aggrieved against the order passed by the concerned authority, they shall be at liberty to have recourse to the
other remedies as well as to approach this Court.