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 · 282 wordsAmol Rattan Singh, J
All the cases listed today have been taken up for hearing by way of video conferencing because of the situation existing due to the Covid-19 pandemic.
By this petition, filed under the provisions of Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners seek issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus, directing the respondents to count the work charged period or service, i.e. from July 1982 to 22.02.1996, along with regular service from 23.02.1996 till 31.08.2011, for the purpose of grant of pensionary benefits, with a further prayer made for a direction to the respondents not to discriminate against the petitioner from the benefits already granted to similarly situated employees of the same department (petitioners in CWP no.11250 of 2013 titled as Joginder Singh v. PSPCL etc., decided on 03.02.2016 and CWP no.9515 of 2016, titled as Kuljit Singh v. PSPCL and others, decided on 16.05.2016) and in view of instructions dated 18.04.2016 issued by the Punjab Government (copy Annexure P-1).
In respect of his grievance, the petitioner is stated to have made a representation to the respondents on 05.08.2020 (copy Annexure P-6).
Without making any comment on the actual merits of the case, this petition is disposed of with a direction to the competent authority amongst the respondents to take a decision on the representation of the petitioner within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order, by passing a detailed speaking order, taking into consideration the aforesaid judgments, as also the judgment of a Full Bench of this Court in the case of Kesar Chand v. State of Punjab and others, AIR 1988 (P&H) 265.