IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.10020 of 2011 Sital Dass ...Petitioner Versus Food Corporation of India, New Delhi & others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RANJIT SINGH 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? Present: Mr.G.S.Bal, Advocate, for the petitioner. ***** RANJIT SINGH, J. The grievance of the petitioner is that his pay was not re- fixed earlier because of the pending litigation before various courts. The said litigation has now been decided in favour of the petitioner. This would require re-fixation of the pay of the petitioner, though he has retired on 31.3.2008. For the same cause, the petitioner has served a legal notice, which is pending adjudication. Without going into the merits of the controversy, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to consider the legal notice served by the petitioner and pass an order in accordance with law within a period of three months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. June 01, 2011 ( RANJIT SINGH ) ramesh JUDGE