LPA No. 437 of 2010 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. LPA No. 437 of 2010 Date of decision 9 .8.2010 Uttar Haryana Bijl iVitran Nigam Ltd ... Appellant Versus Raghbir Singh Jaglan ... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. KUMAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.N. JINDAL Present: Mr.Surender Deswal ,Advocate for the , appellant 1.To be referred to the Reporter or not ? 2.Whether the judgement should be reported in the Digest ? M.M.KUMAR, J. The instant appeal filed under Clause X of the Letters Patent is directed against judgement dated 2.12.2009 rendered by a learned Single Judge of this Court holding that the appellant could not have withheld the pension of the petitioner on the ground that the provisions of Rule 2.2 (b) of Civil Service Rules, Volume 1 would be attracted. The learned Single Judge placed reliance on the observations made by a Full Bench of this Court in the case of Ishar Singh v. State of Punjab 1994(3) RSJ 543 to record a conclusion that even in cases where departmental enquiry is pending after retirement the pensionary benefits cannot be withheld and 100 % provisional pension has to be released. It has further been held that on the date of retirement of the petitioner- respondent there was no departmental proceeding or criminal challan pending against him and the provisions of Rule 2.2(b) of the Rules could not have been invoked. In any any case,learned counsel for the appellant has not been able to dispute that the LPA No. 437 of 2010 2 directions issued by this Court in the impugned judgement have been complied with and the pension has been released to the petitioner- respondent. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and in view of the settled position in law, we are of the view that no interference in the opinion expressed by the learned Single Judge would be warranted especially when the directions issued stand already complied with. There is no merit in the appeal . Dismissed. (M.M.Kumar) Judge (A. N. Jindal ) 9.8.2010 Judge okg