IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Civil Writ Petition No. 10012 of 2008 DATE OF DECISION : JULY 30, 2009 GURINDER SINGH ....... PETITIONER(S) VERSUS STATE OF PUNJAB & ORS. .... RESPONDENT(S) CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA PRESENT: Mr. Amit Jhanji, Advocate, for the petitioner(s). Ms. Charu Tuli, Senior DAG, Punjab. Mr. Amol Rattan Singh, Advocate, for respondent No.5. AJAI LAMBA, J. (Oral) This Civil Writ Petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India has been filed praying for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to release the pension of the petitioner along with consequential benefits. Without adverting to the detailed facts, it has been brought out by the learned counsel for the respondent-State that the amount due on account of Leave Encashment, General Provident Fund and Group Civil Writ Petition No. 10012 of 2008 2 Insurance Scheme has been released to the petitioner. Only Gratuity was not released. Provisional pension had been sanctioned. Learned counsel for the respondent-State further states that a Vigilance case was pending against the petitioner. However, the petitioner has been discharged. In this regard, learned counsel for the respondent-State has stated that vide order dated 31.10.2008, the department of Water Supply and Sanitation has been informed that the respondents have taken a decision not to file any appeal against the discharge of the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner is in dire need of money as he is suffering from brain tumor and is admitted in the hospital. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this petition is disposed of with directions to the Secretary to Government of Punjab, Department of Water Supply and Sanitation, Punjab (respondent No.2), Chief Engineer, Department of Water Supply and Sanitation, Patiala (respondent No.3) and the Accountant General (A&E), Punjab (respondent No.4) to finalise the case of the petitioner for release of all pending retrial dues, within 4 weeks from today. The petitioner would be at liberty to file a representation to the respondents, detailing the events, to indicate delay in release of retiral benefits. In case, such a representation is filed, the respondents would consider the representation and allow interest to the petitioner, if found entitled to the same. In case, the petitioner is aggrieved in that regard, he Civil Writ Petition No. 10012 of 2008 3 shall be at liberty to approach this Court. July 30, 2009 ( AJAI LAMBA ) Kang JUDGE 1. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?