C.W.P. No.6374 of 2005 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** C.W.P. No.6374 of 2005 Date of Decision:20.04.2007 Madan Lal Pandhi .....Petitioner Vs. Managing Director, Pepsu Road Transport Corporation, Patiala and another .....Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M.KUMAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL Present:- Mr. R.S.Chauhan, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Harsh Aggarwal, Advocate for the respondents. **** JUDGMENT M.M.KUMAR, J. The petitioner, who is a retired employee of the Pepsu Road Transport Corporation, has filed the instant petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for quashing order dated 2.7.2001 (P-4) whereby the pay of the petitioner has been re-fixed. The petitioner has asserted that due to the aforementioned action of the respondents his pension has been reduced. Further relief has been sought directing the respondents to re- fix/restore the pay of the petitioner to the level he was drawing earlier and the same be brought at par with that of his junior Gurnam Singh and thereafter to release all retrial and benefits viz. Commuted value of pension, gratuity, monthly pension, DCRG etc. by calculating the same on the basis of his actual last pay drawn. The petitioner has also claimed that all arrears of pay/retiral benefits may be released to him with interest @ 18% per annum. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record with their assistance we find that for the reliefs claimed in the instant petition, the petitioner has already represented to the respondents on 10.6.2004 (P-6) and subsequently a legal notice dated 8.7.2004 (P-7) was also served upon the respondents. The aforementioned representation and legal notice have not been decided by the respondents by passing a speaking order. In view of above, without going into the merits of the case, we C.W.P. No.6374 of 2005 -2- deem it just and appropriate to direct the respondents to take cognizance of the representation and legal notice (Annexures P-6 and P-7) sent by the petitioner and decide the same expeditiously preferably within a period of two months from the date a certified copy of this order is presented to them. It shall be appreciated if a speaking order is passed. If the claim of the petitioner is found to be meritorious and decided in his favour then all the benefits be released to him forthwith. The writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms. ( M.M.KUMAR ) JUDGE April 20, 2007 ( RAJESH BINDAL) renu JUDGE