COCP No. 1590 of 2009 1 In the High Court for the States of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh … COCP No. 1590 of 2009(O&M) Date of decision: November 5, 2009 Surinder Kaur Gupta .. Petitioner Versus Harcharanjit Kaur Brar and others ..Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rakesh Kumar Garg Present: Mr. Sandeep Jasuja, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. M.C.Berry, Addl.A.G.Punjab with the respondents .. Rakesh Kumar Garg,J(Oral) As per the averments made in this petition, CWP No.3495 of 2009 filed by the petitioner was disposed of vide judgment dated 5.3.2009 in the following terms:- In view of the above, this petition is disposed of with a direction to respondents to take a decision on the representations(Annexures P-5 and P-6) within a period of two months from the date a certified copy of this order is furnished to the competent authority. If the petitioner is found entitled to any claim, the same be released to her in accordance with law within a period of one month thereafter. Needless to say, in the event the claim of the petitioner is to be rejected, it shall be by a reasoned and speaking order. The grievance of the petitioner is that despite representation, the respondents have failed to pass any order on the representation of the petitioner in compliance of the orders passed by this court. In response to the show cause notice issued by this court, reply by way of an affidavit of Harbans Singh, District Education Officer(Secondary), COCP No. 1590 of 2009 2 Ferozepur has been filed wherein it has been submitted as under:- “That in compliance with the aforementioned direction of this Hon'ble Court, it is respectfully submitted that the claim of the petitioner that she has not been paid the difference of salary and pension of the petitioner of service rendered by her under the Reemployment Scheme for the period 1.11.2007 to 31.3.2008 has been considered and allowed vide order dated 15.10.2009. Speaking order in this regard has been passed and the copy of the same has been attached herewith as Annexure R-1. A copy of D.P.I. Secondary order is being appended as Annexure R-2(T). It is further submitted that the petitioner has been paid Rs. 76064/- on 23.10.2009 vide cheque No. 263755 dated 23.10.2009 on this account. The copy of the receipt is attached as Annexure R-3(T) It is further submitted that another claim raised in Annexure P- 5 and P-6 is that the petitioner has not been paid 10 % of her gratuity amount (35000) has also been considered and has been allowed Annexure R-4. It is further submitted that petitioner has been paid Rs. 35000/- on 23.10.,2009 vide Cheque No.263756 dated 23.10.2009 on this account. The copy of the receipt is attached as Annexure R-3(T).” A speaking order has been passed on the representation of the petitioner as directed by this court and further the petitioner has been paid an amount of Rs. 76064/- on 23.10.2009 under receipt. In view of the aforesaid, I am not inclined to proceed further in this petition. Rule discharged. However, the petitioner shall be at liberty to challenge order Annexure R-1 in accordance with law. November 5, 2009 (RAKESH KUMAR GARG) nk JUDGE