Civil Writ Petition No.10222 of 2006 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.10222 of 2006 Date of decision: April 02, 2008 Janta Singh … Petitioner Versus Managing Director, Pepsu Road Transport Corporation and another … Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA Present: Mr. R.S. Chauhan, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. R.S. Ahluwalia, Advocate for the respondents. KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA , J. The present writ petition has been filed by Janta Singh, who retired as a conductor from the respondent, Pepsu Road Transport Corporation, Patiala. In the present writ petition, he has sought quashing of the impugned order dated 7th April, 2006 (Annexure P-5), whereby respondents rejected the claim of the petitioner to release retiral/ pensionary benefits after adding two annual grade increments, which were ordered to be stopped without cumulative effect for a period of two years despite the fact that the period of punishment already expired in November, 2000. Briefly stated, petitioner was appointed as a conductor in Pepsu Road Transport Corporation on 11th March, 1979. The petitioner Civil Writ Petition No.10222 of 2006 2 claimed that after rendering service for 31 years, he left the service of the corporation w.e.f. 31st July, 2002 as per order dated 22nd July, 2002. According to the petitioner, his three annual grade increments were ordered to be stopped without cumulative effect as per order dated 9th November, 2001 on the ground that on 7th July, 1999, he issued less tickets amounting to Rs.120/-. Petitioner had filed an appeal before the appellate authority, which was partly accepted and punishment of stoppage of three annual grade increments without cumulative effect was reduced to that of two annual grade increments without cumulative effect as per order issued on 11th July, 2002. It has been stated in the writ petition that four years have passed since the retirement of the petitioner. Since two increments were stopped without cumulative effect, therefore, the benefit of the two increments should have been counted while preparing pension of the petitioner and other retiral benefits. In reply, respondent-corporation has stated that the punishing authority on 9th November, 2001 ordered stoppage of three increments without cumulative effect. On acceptance of the appeal, punishment was modified from stoppage of three increments to two increments vide order dated 11th July, 2002. It has been stated that the petitioner was granted his annual increments w.e.f. 1st January, 2001 and next two increments had to accrue on 1st January, 2002 and 1st January, 2003 and the same were stopped in terms of order dated 11th July, 2002 (order of the appellate authority). Thus, the petitioner was not entitled to get his further increments till 1st January, 2003 and if the order of the punishing authority after modification by the appellate authority was to be given effect, then the further increment had only to accrue to the petitioner on 1st January, 2004. But before the same could happen, petitioner sought voluntary retirement w.e.f. 31st July, 2002. Thus, the order of the punishing authority Civil Writ Petition No.10222 of 2006 3 could not be acted upon and before its having taken effect, petitioner had retired, therefore, petitioner is not entitled to the claim made in the writ petition. Therefore, no disadvantage has accrued to the petitioner while his pension papers were drawn and pension was calculated. We have confronted the counsel for the petitioner with the preliminary objection taken by the respondent, which has been reasserted before us by the counsel for the respondents. Counsel for the petitioner has been unable to rebut the factual position and therefore, we find no merit in the present writ petition and the same is liable to be dismissed. [KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA] JUDGE [ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA] JUDGE April 02, 2008. rps