IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.O.C.P. No.996 of 1999 (O&M) Date of Decision:- 03.04.2008 Kedar Nath Gupta ....Petitioner(s) through Mr.V.K.Jindal, Advocate vs. Mrs.S.K.Sidhu & anr. ....Respondent(s) through Mr.Mukesh Berry, Additional Advocate General, Punjab. *** CORAM:-HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT. *** 1) Whether Reporters of the 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? *** SURYA KANT, J. (ORAL) Mr.Mukesh Berry, learned Additional Advocate General, Punjab, has filed an affidavit of Jagtar Singh, DPI (SE), Punjab- respondent No.2 and as per the averments made therein, all the petitioners (except petitioner No.8) have been promoted to PES-II with effect from the due dates and consequential arrears of pay till they retire from service have also been paid. As regard to petitioner No.8, it is stated that he retired on 30.11.1989 whereas his junior was promoted on 27.3.1990, therefore, he cannot be promoted. During the course of hearing, it is, however, not disputed by Shri Mukesh Berry, learned Additional Advocate General, Punjab, that the petitioners are also entitled for the consequential revised pension and other retiral benefits. C.O.C.P. No.996 of 1999 (O&M) -2- In this view of the matter, when the directions issued by this Court have been substantially complied with, this petition is disposed of with a clarificatory direction that if the petitioners are so required, may submit their cases for the revised retiral benefits within a period of one month and thereafter the respondents shall fix their revised pension and other retiral benefits and release the consequential arrears within three months from the date of submission of the revised pension case(s). Disposed of. April 03, 2008 ( SURYA KANT ) poonam JUDGE