IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** C.W.P. No.8406 of 2011 Date of Decision:08.09.2011 Bhura Singh .....Petitioner Vs. State of Punjab and another .....Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE DAYA CHAUDHARY Present:- Mr. D.D. Bansal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. N.S. Pawar, Addl. AG, Punjab. Mr. Anil Sharma, Advocate for respondent No.2. **** DAYA CHAUDHARY, J.(Oral) The present petition has been filed for issuance of direction to the respondents to release the benefits of pension by taking into consideration the entire length of service rendered by the petitioner with the respondents on the post of Baildar on temporary basis. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was appointed as Baildar on temporary basis on 20.11.1984 and his service was regularised with effect from 1.8.2000 and ultimately he retired on attaining the age of superannuation vide order dated 20.5.2004. A representation was made by the petitioner for payment of pensionary benefits. He being an illiterate person, under the wrong impression approached the authority under the provisions of Payment of Gratuity Act and under the orders of the Controlling Authority, an order was passed for payment of Rs.16,145/- to the petitioner and subsequently, he filed an appeal before the Appellate Authority, which was allowed and order for C.W.P. No.8406 of 2011 -2- payment of the amount of Rs.48,366/- was passed and that amount has been paid by the respondents. Municipal Corporation – respondent No.2 filed C.W.P. No.4973 of 2008 which was dismissed by this Court vide order dated 3.10.2008. Against the said order, SLP has also been filed, which is still pending. Learned counsel appearing for the Municipal Corporation – respondent No.2 submits that the petitioner cannot get the other benefits as an amount of gratuity has already been received by him and the SLP is still pending before Hon'ble the Supreme Court. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the amount received by the petitioner would be subject to the decision of SLP pending before Hon'ble the Supreme Court and other retiral benefits can be released as he is entitled for other retiral benefits in view of the judgment dated 22.9.2008 in C.W.P. No.12760 of 2007. In view of statements made by learned counsel for the parties, the present petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to release the retiral benefits as given to the similarly situated employee, who has filed C.W.P. No.12760 of 2007 as the said judgment as not been stayed by Hon'ble the Supreme Court and also amount of gratuity subject to the decision of SLP pending before Hon'ble the Supreme Court. September 08, 2011 ( DAYA CHAUDHARY ) renu JUDGE