CWP No.225 of 2009.doc - 1 – HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** CWP No.225 of 2009 Date of Decision: 07.07.2010 **** Randhir Singh . . . Petitioner VS. State of Haryana and others . . . Respondents **** CORAM : HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT **** 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? **** Present: Mr. SK Bansal, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. Ravi Dutt Sharma, DAG Haryana Mr. Narender Hooda, Advocate for respondents No.2 & 3 ***** SURYA KANT J. (ORAL) (1). The petitioner seeks a mandamus to direct the respondents to grant him pension instead of EPF benefits w.e.f. the date of his retirement i.e. 31.05.2002. (2). Notice of motion was issued and in response thereto, the respondents have filed their reply-affidavit. (3). It is not in dispute that the petitioner initially joined the PWD Electricity Branch Department, Government of Punjab on 17.11.1965 as Assistant Lineman and after his services were transferred to the Haryana State Electricity Board, he retired w.e.f. CWP No.225 of 2009.doc - 2 – 31.05.2002, after serving more than 37 years. The petitioner has thus more than the ‘qualifying service’ required for the grant of pension and other retrial dues to his credit. (4). There is no denial to the fact that at the time when the petitioner joined the service or even while he was in service, the petitioner was entitled to the EPF scheme as the ‘pension scheme’ came to be introduced later on. The respondents have nowhere averred that the petitioner was given any option to switch over to the pension scheme from the EPF/GPF Scheme. That being so, the petitioner is also entitled to the benefit of various decisions rendered by this Court from time to time including dated 18.08.2004 passed in CWP No.15434 of 1997 (Ravi Dutt Mehta v. State of Haryana & Others) (Annexure P6). (5). The writ petition is, accordingly, allowed and with a direction to the respondents to grant pensionary benefits/pension to the petitioner w.e.f. 31.05.2002 along with other retrial dues within a period of three months from the date he deposits the entire amount of EPF along with interest as may be prescribed by the respondents. The amount required to be deposited by the petitioner along with interest shall CWP No.225 of 2009.doc - 3 – be communicated to him within a period of one month from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order. (6). Ordered accordingly. (7). Dasti . (SURYA KANT) JUDGE 07.07.2010 vishal shonkar