IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.20975 of 2008 Date of Decision: December 08, 2009 Mohinder Singh .....PETITIONER(S) VERSUS State of Punjab & Others .....RESPONDENT(S) . . . CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA PRESENT: - Mr. Raman Sharma, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. B.S. Chahal, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab, for the respondents. . . . AJAI LAMBA, J (Oral) Gist of the claim in this petition filed under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India is that action of the respondents in not considering the petitioner as a regular Provincial Reserve Chowkidar, though he retired after rendering more than 25 years of service is illegal. The claim has been made for retiral benefits, the petitioner having served the respondents for 25 years. It has been brought out that the CWP No.20975 of 2008 [2] petitioner was given appointment as PR Chowkidar in the Department of Food and Supplies, Punjab on 20.1.1983 through Employment Exchange. The petitioner superannuated on 31.10.2008 from the office of respondent No.4 i.e. District Manager, PUNGRAIN, Faridkot. It seems that services of the petitioner were transferred to PUNGRAIN where the petitioner attained the age of superannuation. In nutshell, it has been pointed out that the case of the petitioner would be covered by Instructions dated 13.8.2009 (Annexure P-8) issued by the Director, Food & Civil Supplies, Punjab to the District Food & Supplies Controller, Sangrur. Learned counsel for the respondents has not been able to dispute that Annexure P-8 indeed had been issued. I have considered the issue. The short argument of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the case of the petitioner be considered in the context of Instructions dated 13.8.2009 (Annexure P-8). The Instructions read as under:- “Subject: Regarding absorption of temporary PR Chowkidars in Pungrain w.e.f. 29.11.2007. Reference your memo no.A-16-2009/48 dated 8.1.2009 on the above subject. As per memo no.A-57(Policy)-2008/3272 dated 5.12.2008, the Chowkidars were sent to Punsup and CWP No.20975 of 2008 [3] Pungrain w.e.f. 29.11.2007 because the letter has been issued on 5.12.2008 and because the Govt. instructions cannot be given effect with effect from retrospective date, the employees who have retired or died on or before 30.11.2008 are entitled to pensionary benefits. Appropriate action may be taken accordingly.” In view of the contents of the Instructions, the respondents are directed to consider the case of the petitioner in the context of Annexure P-8, portion whereof has been extracted above, and pass appropriate orders as required by law and as warranted by facts. Decision be taken within three months of receipt of a certified copy of the order. Disposed of accordingly. (AJAI LAMBA) December 08, 2009 JUDGE avin 1. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?