CWP No.15532 of 2009.doc - 1 – HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** CWP No.15532 of 2009 (O&M) Date of Decision: 03.02.2010 **** Janak Rani . . . . Petitioner VS. State of Punjab 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. Suresh Ghai, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. B.S. Chahal, DAG Punjab ***** SURYA KANT J. (ORAL) (1). The petitioner seeks a direction against deduction of DA from the family pension granted vide Pension Payment Order dated 09.08.1991 (Annexure P1). The respondents have filed their counter-reply, which is taken on record. As per their plea, the DA on family pension has been withdrawn on the ground that the son of the petitioner had already been employed as a Constable on compassionate grounds. CWP No.15532 of 2009.doc - 2 – (2). During the course of hearing it is stated by the counsel for the parties that the controversy involved in this writ petition stands answered by this Court in CWP No.891 of 2003, Mukhtiar Singh and others vs. State of Punjab and others decided on 20.01.2004. (3). The writ petition is, accordingly, allowed in part in terms of the decision rendered by this Court in Mukhtiar Singh’s case (supra) to the extent that while the petitioner is not entitled to DA on family pension, however, no recovery of the DA already paid shall be effected. The recovery, if any, already made shall be refunded to the petitioner within a period of three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. (4). Ordered accordingly. (5). Dasti . (SURYA KANT) JUDGE 03.02.2010 vishal shonkar