IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.3125 of 2010 Date of Decision : July 22, 2010. Sukhchain Singh .....Petitioner versus Punjab State Civil Supplies Corporation Ltd. .....Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT. Present : Mr.Namit Kumar, Advocate, for the petitioner. -.- 1. Whether Reporters of 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) The petitioner, who retired as an Inspector from the Punjab State Civil Supplies Corporation Limited (for short `the PUNSUP), seeks quashing of the order dated 27.6.2007 (Annexure P-6) whereby the amount recoverable from him in terms of the Civil Court decree has been adjusted against his retiral dues. According to the petitioner, no recovery can be effected from him in terms of the Civil Court decree as he has already been sent to `civil imprisonment' in execution proceedings. It is urged that the 'pension' and retiral dues cannot be attached in execution of a money decree. The petitioner's further grievance is that no order with regard to payment of arrears of salary for the period he remained under suspension and/or out of service, has been passed by the Competent Authority under C.W.P.No .3125 of 2010 2 Rule 7.3 (1) of the Punjab Civil Services Rules, Volume-I, Part-I, despite the representation submitted by him, followed by a legal notice dated 20.2.2008 (Annexure P-7). I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner at some length and perused the records. In my considered view, the first contention need not be entertained by this Court in exercise of its writ jurisdiction as the petitioner would be at liberty to raise such a plea before the Executing Court who has not so far consigned the application moved by the respondents being fully satisfied. As regards the petitioner's plea of non- payment of arrears of salary for the period he remained under suspension and/or out of service as per Rule 7.3 (1) of the Rules (ibid), it is imperative upon the respondents to pass an appropriate order in accordance with the Rules. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of with a direction to the respondent to take cognizance of the above-mentioned legal notice served on behalf of the petitioner and dispose of the same by passing a speaking order, preferably within a period of three months from the date of receiving a certified copy of this order. Dasti. July 22, 2010 (SURYA KANT) Mohinder JUDGE