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
5 paragraphs · 254 wordsSurinder Singh, Judge
Petitioner was the driver with the third respondent. He retired on 30.6.2004 on attaining the age of superannuation. By means of the present petition, he sought the following relief:
"(i) This Hon''ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue writ of mandamus directing the respondents to pay due and permissible pension to the petitioner after adjusting the element of employer share of EPF contribution and EPF pension in accordance with HP Corporate Sector Employees (Pension, Family Pension, Commutation of Pension and Gratuity) Scheme, 1999 notified on 29.12.1999 Annexure P-1 for which the petitioner has opted."
Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that this matter is covered by the judgment passed by this Court in CWP No. 4998 of 2010 titled as Bimla Sood versus State of H.P. and others, against which LPA No. 346 of 2011 is pending. But however, the petitioner would feel satisfied, if the respondents consider his case in the light of Bimla Sood''s judgment, supra, in case it attains finality in the LPA.
In CWP No. 638 of 2012, ( Shri Shamsher Singh versus State of H.P. & others) decided on 28th February, 2012, by the Principal Bench of this Court, a similar request was also allowed. Therefore, for the reasons aforesaid, the respondents are directed to consider the case of the petitioner within two months in the light of Bimla Sood''s judgment, supra, on attaining finality in the LPA. With these directions, the writ petition stands disposed of, so also pending application(s), if any.