IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No.5709 of 2000 DATE OF DECISION: NOVEMBER 09, 2010 Indraj Singh, Supdt.(Retd.) (dead) through L.R. .....PETITIONER Versus The Financial Commissioner & Secy. to Govt. of Haryana,Education Deptt., Chandigarh and others ....RESPONDENTS CCORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SATISH KUMAR MITTAL HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE JORA SINGH --- Present: Mr. R.S. Hooda, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. G.S. Chahal, Addl. A.G., Haryana. .. SATISH KUMAR MITTAL, J. (Oral) Petitioner Indraj Singh had filed this petition after his retirement for issuing a writ of mandamus to the respondents to calculate his pensionary benefits by giving him the benefit of military service from 26.10.1962 to 1.1.1967 in the Civil Service by taking his service from 25.9.1969 to 31.3.1998, which includes the ad hoc service rendered by him. During the pendency of the writ petition, the petitioner has expired and vide order dated 7.3.2002 passed by this Court, his legal representative has been impleaded. During the course of arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that for the relief claimed in the writ petition, the petitioner had submitted a legal notice-cum-final demand notice, copy of CWP No.5709 of 2000 -2- which has been annexed as Annexure P7 with the petition. He submitted that the said legal notice-cum-final demand notice has not been considered by the respondents and no order has been passed on the same. He further submitted that the petitioner will be satisfied if the Director, Higher Education, Haryana, Chandigarh (respondent No.2) be directed to decide the said legal notice-cum-final demand notice by passing a speaking order in light of earlier decision made by this Court. Learned counsel for the respondents after getting instructions from the official concerned, states that the said legal notice-cum-final demand notice submitted by the petitioner will be decided by respondent No.2 within a period of three months, in accordance with law. Consequently, we dispose of this writ petition with a direction to respondent No.2 to consider and decide the legal notice-cum-final demand notice (Annexure P7) submitted by the petitioner, within three months, by passing a speaking order. It will be appreciated if the petitioner is also given an opportunity of hearing before deciding the said legal notice. (SATISH KUMAR MITTAL) JUDGE November 09, 2010 ( JORA SINGH ) vkg JUDGE