IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP. No. 7510 of 2009 Date of Decision: 19.5.2009. Pritam Singh --Petitioner Versus State of Punjab & others --Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE PERMOD KOHLI. Present:- Mr. Ashok Bhardwaj, Advocate for the petitioner. *** PERMOD KOHLI.J (ORAL) Notice of motion. Mr. B.S. Chahal, DAG, Punjab has been asked to accept notice on behalf of respondents-State. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, this petition is disposed of at the motion stage itself. The petitioner has retired from service as Class-IV employee on 29.2.2008 on attaining the age of superannuation. While in service, criminal case under FIR No. 22 dated 15.3.2007 under Sections 15/61/85 of the NDPS Act was registered against him and petitioner is facing trial. On the basis of the aforesaid case petitioner was suspended vide order dated 29.3.2007 w.e.f 12.3.2007. However, the petitioner was ordered to be reinstated on 19.10.2007. The grievance of the petitioner is that he has not been paid any pensionary/retiral benefit till date. In so far as the pension is concerned the petitioner is entitled to the provisional pension. Regarding the claim of petitioner for pensionary/retiral benefits, the matter is required to be considered on conclusion of the criminal proceedings against the petitioner. Even the CWP. No. 7510 of 2009 -2- period of suspension has not been decided till date. The petitioner has also filed a representation dated 22.10.2008 (Annexure P-4) but no decision has been taken thereon till date. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner will be satisfied if respondents are directed to take decision on the representation of the petitioner. In view of the above, this petition is disposed of with a direction to the competent authority to take decision on the representation of the petitioner within a period of three months from the date certified copy of this order is served upon the competent authority. It is further directed that the petitioner shall be entitled to at least the provisional pension and the respondents will settle the case for provisional pension within the aforesaid period. The Respondents are further directed to decide the period of suspension in view of the reinstatement of the petitioner. Disposed of as such. (PERMOD KOHLI) JUDGE 19.5.2009 lucky