Civil Writ Petition No.2389 of 2009 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.2389 of 2009 DATE OF DECISION: MAY 12, 2011 Krishan Lal Manuja .....Petitioner VERSUS Dayanand Anglo Vedic College Trust and Management Society & another ....Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RANJIT SINGH PRESENT: Mr. B.S. Walia, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Kapil Sharma, Advocate, for the respondents. **** RANJIT SINGH, J. The petitioner has approached this Court through present writ petition with more than one grievance. The petitioner prays for grant of pension and the gratuity. The petitioner has also prayed for leave encashment and contribution to pension fund. In addition, the petitioner claims salary for the period of three months for which he had given notice. His request was accepted while waiving the condition of three months notice. Counsel for the respondents points out that the petitioner is required to complete certain formalities by assigning certain documents with the Provident Fund Commissioner, where his pension is lying deposited, for Civil Writ Petition No.2389 of 2009 -2- release. Counsel for the petitioner undertakes to appear before the Provident Fund Commissioner on 27.5.2011. All the formalities that are required to be completed for release be got completed by the Provident Fund Commissioner and thereafter, action would be taken to release the pension payable to the petitioner within a period of two weeks thereafter. As per the respondents, the gratuity payable has been released. However, the claim of the petitioner is that w.e.f. January, 2006, cap on the gratuity upto ` 3,00000/- has been removed and now gratuity payable is increased to ` 10,00000/-. The petitioner was paid gratuity of ` 3,00000/-, though the petitioner has retired w.e.f February, 2006. Prima facie, the petitioner may be entitled to gratuity at the enhanced amount. If the petitioner is entitled to such gratuity, his claim in this regard be considered and if denied, it should be done by passing a speaking order. The salary, which is payable to the petitioner should also be considered in the light of the fact that he had not joined at the transferred place and ignoring that aspect he was permitted to seek premature retirement. As per the counsel for the respondents, leave encashment for the period due has already been released. However, there seems to be some dispute in regard to the period for which this leave encashment was required to be paid. Let the petitioner file a representation for the same by giving out the reasons for which he would be entitled to leave encashment for any different period than the period for which the payment has been made to him. The petitioner may also make a representation for grant of three months salary for the period for which he had Civil Writ Petition No.2389 of 2009 -3- served a notice, but the requirement was waived. The respondents shall pass a speaking order on the issue raised by the petitioner in his representation. In case the relief is denied to the petitioner, he would be at liberty to approach any appropriate legal forum. The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of. May 12, 2011 (RANJIT SINGH) monika JUDGE