IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. C.W.P. No. 3522 of 1999 ( O&M ) DATE OF DECISION : 11.09.2009 Surinder Singh ... PETITIONER Versus The Haryana Vidyut Parsaran Nigam Limited and another ..... RESPONDENTS CORAM :- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SATISH KUMAR MITTAL Present: Mr. R.K. Malik, Senior Advocate, with Mr. Vishal Malik, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. R.S. Chahar and Mr. Babbar Bhan, Advocates, for the respondents. * * * SATISH KUMAR MITTAL , J. (Oral ) The petitioner, who was working as Driver with the Haryana Vidyut Parsaran Nigam Limited (hereinafter referred to as `the respondent Nigam') and had retired on 31.7.1998, has filed the instant petition for issuing direction to the respondents to release his retiral benefits by adding the work charge service rendered by him from 1.2.1970 to 12.4.1973. The respondent Nigam has not counted the said service on the ground that in spite of the instructions issued vide circulars dated 6.8.1993 and 8.9.1994, the petitioner did not exercise the option within the stipulated period. On the other hand, it is the case of the petitioner that he was not aware of the aforesaid instructions, as the same were not got noted from him. This issue CWP No. 3522 of 1999 -2- was considered and decided by a Division Bench of this Court in CWP No. 8573 of 2004, titled as Sh. Bharpoor Singh (Retired A.F.M.) versus Dakshin Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd. and others, decided on 16.9.2005, and the similar claim of an employee for counting his work charge service was accepted. The SLP (Civil) No. 7284 of 2006, filed against the said judgment, which was taken up with a bunch of SLPs, has been dismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. This Court, while taking into consideration the above fact, has allowed CWP No. 16846 of 2007, titled as Ram Kishan Versus Dakshin Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Limited and others, decided on 9.9.2009, while observing as under : “In view of the aforesaid legal position, learned counsel for the respondents is not in a position to show any record, whereby the aforesaid instructions were ever got noted from the petitioner. In view of this conceded factual position, this writ petition is allowed and the respondents are directed to allow the petitioner to exercise his option in accordance with the instructions dated 6.8.1993 and 9.8.1994, within a period of three months from today, and thereafter, the work charge service of the petitioner be counted towards the pensionary benefits. It is made clear that in terms of the aforesaid instructions, the petitioner will deposit the employer's contribution of EPF with interest, immediately after exercising the option.” In the instant case also, learned counsel for the respondents has not been able to show any record, whereby the instructions dated 6.8.1993 and CWP No. 3522 of 1999 -3- 9.8.1994 were ever got noted from the petitioner. Consequently, this petition is allowed and the respondents are directed to allow the petitioner to exercise his option in accordance with the aforesaid instructions within a period of three months from today and thereafter, the respondents shall inform the petitioner regarding the amount of employer's contribution of EPF to be deposited by him within further one month, which shall be deposited by the petitioner within two months thereafter. After the deposit of the said amount by the petitioner, the respondents shall count his work charge service from 1.2.1970 to 12.4.1973 towards his pensionary benefits and consequently, release the enhanced amount without any delay. September 11, 2009 ( SATISH KUMAR MITTAL ) ndj JUDGE