Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
HARPREET SINGH BRAR
Hari Singh – Appellant
Versus
Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
HARPREET SINGH BRAR, J.
1. Instant writ petition has been filed under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India for issuance of writ in the nature of certiorari seeking quashing of the letter dated 27.10.2017 (Annexure P-20) issued by respondent No.6 and letter dated 19.12.2017 (Annexure P-21) issued by respondent No.3, vide which claim of the petitioner for fixing his pension @ Rs.26,640/- per month was rejected and further to issue a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to fix pension of the petitioner @ Rs.26,640/- per month, instead of Rs.24,240/- per month.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner, inter alia, contends that the petitioner was appointed as a Telephonist under the respondents on 05.09.1977 and was later merged into the clerical cadre vide order dated 21.01.1982. Subsequently, the petitioner applied through open selection and was duly appointed as a Sub-Station Attendant (SSA) against an advertisement issued by the Board, with the appointment order dated 29.04.1986. Owing to administrative delays not attributable to the petitioner, he was ultimately placed at the disposal of Bhakra Beas Management Board (BBMB) and joined as SSA on 06.
The court affirms that approved promotions necessitate timely pension disbursement and that procedural compliance is essential in public service compensation.
The promotions of the petitioners were in conformity with the Rules of 1989, and the objections raised by the State were not valid.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
