IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No. 2709 of 2003 Date of decision: 4th December, 2008 Virender Kumar Gupta and others … Petitioners Versus State of Haryana and others … Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA Present: Ms. Alka Chatrath, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Jayender Singh Chandail, Addl. AG Haryana for the State. Mr. N.D. Kalra, Advocate with Mr. Narender Hooda, Advocate for the respondents No.2. KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA, J. (ORAL) Mr. Narender Hooda has stated that all workmen of the respondent No.2 (hereinafter referred to as, ‘the Corporation’), who have been retrenched, are entitled to retrenchment compensation. If retrenchment compensation has not been paid, same shall be paid to the workmen as and when they approach the Corporation. He further states that those employees, who were above the age of 55 years, subject to filing of their affidavits in the proforma circulated by the Corporation, are entitled to Rs.1.00 lac as compensation. Mr.Hooda has stated that almost all the employees have been paid the compensation. Those who have not received the same, can approach the Corporation. He has further stated that those employees, who were declared surplus and died, they are entitled to be given Rs.2.50 lacs as compensation. In case any petitioner has died, his family shall be entitled to compensation of Rs.2.50 lacs. Civil Writ Petition No. 2709 of 2003 Mr.Hooda further stated that as per the policy of 2006 and 2007, an effort is being made for the adjustment/ absorption of the employees, who were less than 55 years of age, according to that policy. Ms. Alka Chatrath appearing for the petitioners states that in case the Corporation adheres to the submissions made by Mr.Hooda, she has no grievance. She further states that the employees are agitating about their pay protection and continuity of service. Mr.Jayender Singh Chandail, Addl. AG Haryana has stated that claim of the employees regarding pay protection and continuity of service was considered and rejected. Ms. Chatrath has stated that she has reliable information that the Government is re-considering the relief of pay protection and continuity of service. In case relief of pay protection and continuity of service is under the active consideration of the Government, same shall be decided within three months from the receipt of certified copy of this order. Needless to say, the employees shall be entitled to pay protection and continuity of service, if the same is legally permissible. In case, on re-consideration, petitioners are denied pay protection and continuity of service, they shall be at liberty to approach the Court of law, in accordance with provisions of law. In view of the submissions made above, as prayed, present writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty aforesaid. [KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA] JUDGE December 4, 2008 rps 2