CWP No.9613 of 2010.doc - 1 – HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** CWP No.9613 of 2010 (O&M) Date of Decision: 24.05.2010 **** Ujjal Singh . . . . Petitioner VS. State of Punjab and others . . . . Respondents **** CORAM : HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT **** 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. H.S. Sethi, Advocate for the petitioner ***** SURYA KANT J. (ORAL) (1). The petitioner seeks a mandamus to direct the respondents to grant him the benefit of two decisions of this Court rendered in LPA No.587 of 1992 (Prem Singh Cheema v. Development Commissioner, Punjab State, Chandigarh) decided on 30.05.1997 (Annexure P1) & CWP No.6996 of 1992 (Ved Parkash Kirpal and others vs. State of Punjab and others) decided on 20.01.1998 (Annexure P2) and grant him pension/retiral benefits at par with his junior, namely, Prem Singh Cheema. CWP No.9613 of 2010.doc - 2 – (2). The petitioner’s claim is said to have been recommended by the Directorate vide memo dated 04.03.2010 (Annexure P4) but it no decision appears to have been taken so far by the State Government. (3). In these circumstances and without expressing any views on merits, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No.1 and 2 to consider and dispose of the above-mentioned claim of the petitioner in accordance with law/policy and by passing a speaking order within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. (4). It needs hardly any mention that if the petitioner is held entitled to any relief, the same shall also be granted/released in his favour within the stipulated period. (5). Ordered accordingly. (6). Dasti . (SURYA KANT) JUDGE 24.05.2010 vishal shonkar