CWP No.229 of 2009 : 1 : In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh. Date of decision: 10.09.2009 Lieutenant Colonel Anil Kumar Rawat ... Petitioner. Versus The Union of India and others ... Respondents. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PERMOD KOHLI Present: Mr.Rajeev Anand, Advocate,for the petitioner. Ms.Geeta Singhwal, Central Government Standing Counsel, for the respondents. PERMOD KOHLI, J. (Oral): The petitioner was commissioned in the Army (Corps of Electrical and Mechanical Engineers) on 23.08.1986. It is alleged that the petitioner was superseded for the rank of Lieutenant Colonel. He requested for premature retirement vide his application dated 19.02.2008 (Annexure P-1) which was duly recommended at all the levels. The request of the petitioner for premature retirement was approved by the competent authority and the petitioner was ordered to be relieved with effect from 10.01.2009. The petitioner was duly informed vide letter dated 13.10.2008 (Annexure P-2) about the approval of premature retirement. Due to changed circumstances, the petitioner made an application dated 08.12.2008 (Annexure P-3) to the respondents for cancellation of his premature retirement which was duly recommended by the higher authorities vide order dated 15.12.2008 (Annexure P-4). The petitioner was directed to furnish a certificate of non-receipt of retirement benefits which was CWP No.229 of 2009 : 2 : complied with by the petitioner vide Annexure P-5. However, the request of the petitioner for cancellation of premature retirement has been declined by the respondents vide order dated 06.01.2009 (Annexure P-6). It is under these circumstances the petitioner has filed the present writ petition for quashing orders dated 13.10.2008 (Annexure P-2) and 06.01.2009 (Annexure P-6) whereby approval was given for pre retirement and request of cancellation of premature retirement has been rejected, respectively. It is agreed to by the learned counsel for the parties that the controversy involved in the present writ petition is squarely covered by a Division Bench judgment of this Court rendered in the case of Pargat Singh Vs. Union of India and others, (CWP No.16380 of 2007) on 11.08.2008, wherein the following observations/directions have been made:- “By applying the ratio of the aforementioned decisions and the facts of the present case, we find that the action of the respondents, in not considering his request for continuance in service and withdrawal of his earlier request for premature retirement,to be illegal. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed and the order dated 31.10.2006 (Annexure P/4) is quashed. Further, the respondents are directed to reinstate the petitioner with effect from the date he was relieved from the Army i.e.31.10.2006 with continuity of service and notional fixation of his pay with all increments, but without payment of any monetary benefits for the CWP No.229 of 2009 : 3 : period he has remained out of service. It is further directed that the petitioner be reinstated forthwith.” The aforesaid observations are fully applicable to the present case. The petitioner shall be entitled to the relief as indicated above. Writ petition stands allowed. Let the appropriate relief be granted within a period of three months. No costs. 10.09.2009 (PERMOD KOHLI) BLS JUDGE