CWP No.21400 of 2008.doc - 1 – HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** CWP No.21400 of 2008 Date of Decision: 02.03.2010 **** Romesh Chander . . . . 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. Amrik Singh, Advocate for the petitioner Ms. Charu Tuli, Sr. DAG, Punjab ***** SURYA KANT J. (ORAL) (1). The petitioner is a retired Sub Divisional Engineer from the Department of PWD (B&R). He seeks quashing of the letters dated 21.03.2006; 21.08.2006; and 03.12.2007 (Annexure P5; P6; and P7, respectively), whereby, the withdrawal of benefit of ACP/Proficiency Step-up have been recommended and recovery is sought to be effected. (2). Upon notice, the respondents have filed their reply/affidavit explaining that only a show cause notice has been issued to the petitioner following the CWP No.21400 of 2008.doc - 2 – principles of natural justice. The objection taken on behalf of the respondents appears to be correct. (3). In these circumstance, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction that the petitioner may file his reply/objection, if any, against the impugned notices within a period of one month and upon receipt whereof, the respondents shall pass an appropriate order in accordance with law/Government policies within a period of two months from the date of receipt of such reply/objection. It is further directed that in case the respondents pass an adverse order against the petitioner, the same shall not be given effect for a period of one month from the date of its communication to the petitioner to enable him to seek redressal of his grievances before the appropriate authority. However, in such an eventuality the respondents shall release the retiral benefits of the petitioner as per the re- fixed/reduced pay without prejudice to his right to impugn such action. (4). Ordered accordingly. (5). Dasti . (SURYA KANT) JUDGE 02.03.2010 CWP No.21400 of 2008.doc - 3 – vishal shonkar