C.W.P. No. 14538 of 2011 (1) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.W.P. No. 14538 of 2011 DATE OF DECISION: 16.12.2011 Ram Karan ..........Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and others ..........Respondents BEFORE:- HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE DAYA CHAUDHARY Present:- Mr. V.K. Shukla, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. L.S. Virk, DAG, Punjab. Mr. Suvir Kumar, Advocate for respondent No.3. **** DAYA CHAUDHARY, J. Reply on behalf of respondent No.3 has been filed in Court today and the same is taken on record. Learned counsel for the respondent-State submits that two cheques bearing Nos. 133258 dated 24.8.2011 and 124042 dated 28.7.2011 amounting to ` 9075 and 15727/-, respectively, were sent to the petitioner but the same were not accepted by him, which now have duly been accepted by learned counsel for the petitioner, who is present in Court. Learned counsel for the respondent-State further submits that payment has been released to the petitioner as per revised gratuity as under un-revised gratuity, the amount was ` 3,76,085/- and on revision of gratuity it comes to ` 3,85,160/- The amount of revised gratuity as well as revised leave encashment has been paid to the petitioner and now nothing C.W.P. No. 14538 of 2011 (2) remains to be paid to the petitioner. Learned counsel has also brought to the notice of the Court that initially 40% of arrears of revision of pay scale was to be paid, which has already been paid and second installment is to be paid in May, 2012 and third installment is to be paid in May, 2013. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that this is not the whole amount which is to be paid to the petitioner. Learned counsel for respondent No.3 on the basis of reply also submits that amount of revised gratuity as well as leave encashment has been released to the petitioner. In view of the submissions made by counsel for the respondents that necessary payment has been released to the petitioner, the present petition has become infructuous and is dismissed as such. However, in case the petitioner is still aggrieved by any action of the respondents, he is at liberty to make representation to the authorities concerned and in case any representation is made, the same shall be considered by the respondents expeditiously, preferably within a period of three months from the date of submission of representation. Disposed of accordingly. December 16, 2011 (DAYA CHAUDHARY) pooja JUDGE