CWP No. 19558 of 2011 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH -- CWP No. 19558 of 2011 Date of decision: 18.10.2011 Puran Singh ........ Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and others .......Respondent(s) Coram: Hon'ble Ms Justice Nirmaljit Kaur -.- Present: Mr. Johan Kumar, Advocate for the petitioner -.- 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgement? 2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? 3. Whether the judgement should be reported in the Digest? Nirmaljit Kaur, J. (Oral) Prays for issuance of direction to the respondents to treat the suspension period of the petitioner towards regular service and to pay retiral benefits after counting the same; with further prayer, directing the respondent to grant 3rd ACP to the petitioner as per ACP Rules, 2008 as also to give the benefit of 6th Revised Pay Commission. Contends that the petitioner was placed under suspension w.e.f. 29.09.1986 to 08.03.1987, 11.07.1992 to 06.11.1992 and 28.12.1992 to 08.03.2000 and thereafter, his suspension orders were revoked. Now, the petitioner has since retired from service on 31.08.2001 on attaining the age of superannuation. However, no order qua the aforesaid suspension period has been passed and neither any benefit of 3rd ACP has been given to the CWP No. 19558 of 2011 2 petitioner. The petitioner made a representation dated 10.03.2011 (P4) as well as sent a legal notice dated 10.0-9.2011 (P6), requesting that the aforesaid suspension period be counted towards regular period and 3rd ACP be granted to him. However, till date, no action has been taken thereon by the respondents. In view of the above, the present writ petition is disposed of with direction to the respondents to decide the aforesaid representation/legal notice (P4 and P6) of the petitioners as expeditiously as possible, preferably within three months from the receipt of the certified copy of this order. In case, the petitioners are found to be entitled for the said relief, the same shall be granted to them forthwith. However, it goes without saying that if the claim of the petitioners is to be rejected, the respondents shall pass a speaking order. (Nirmaljit Kaur) Judge 18.10.2011 mohan