IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No. 1613 of 2009 Date of Decision: 2.2.2009. Vinod Kumar ---Petitioner Vs. State of Punjab and others ---Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE PERMOD KOHLI. Present:- Mr. B.N. Sehgal, Advocate for the petitioner. *** PERMOD KOHLI.J (ORAL) While serving as a Clerk in the Municipal Corporation, Ludhiana petitioner was placed under suspension vide order No. 220 dated 16.11.2007. His suspension was followed with a charge sheet dated 14.1.2008 (Annexure P-2). In the meantime, petitioner retired from service on 31.3.2008 on attaining age of superannuation. The grievance of the petitioner is that no enquiry has been held against him till date and he has been denied of the retiral benefits. Admittedly, charge sheet was served upon the petitioner during his service and he was reinstated immediately before his retirement due on 28.3.2008. Even almost one year of his retirement, he has not been paid retiral benefits. Petitioner also served a legal notice, which has also not been considered till date. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he will be satisfied only if the respondents are directed to take decision on the legal notice served by the petitioner. CWP No. 1613 of 2009 -2- Accordingly this petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to take a decision on the legal notice of the petitioner within a period of three months from the date certified copy of the order is served upon the competent authority. Needless to say that in the event the claim of the petitioner is to be rejected, it shall be by a reasoned and speaking order. Petition is disposed of as such. (PERMOD KOHLI) JUDGE 2.2.2009 lucky