Civil Writ Petition No.6817 of 1993 -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
Civil Writ Petition No.6817 of 1993
Decided on : 19-11-2009
Bhim Sain .... Petitioner
VERSUS
State of Punjab & others
.... Respondents
CORAM:- HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHESH GROVER.
Present:- Mr. Simarnjit Chahal, Advocate,for
Mr. Anand Chhibbar, Advocate,
for the petitioner.
Mr. M.S. Sindhu, Addl. A.G., Punjab.
MAHESH GROVER, J (Oral).
The instant petition has been filed by the petitioner with
a prayer for issuance of an appropriate writ, directing the
respondents to give service benefits entitled to him for two years
and other pensionary benefits in view of the fact that he was entitled
to continue in service upto the age of 60 years as per the PEPSU
Services Regulations, 1952. The case of the petitioner is that
according to the aforesaid Regulations, he is entitled to continue in
service upto the age of 60 years, but he has retired at the age of 58
years. Reliance has been placed upon numerous judgments of this
Court, which have conclusively and finally determined the issue to
say that according to the aforesaid Regulations, inferior employee of
the earstwhile State of PEPSU is entitled to continue upto the age
Civil Writ Petition No.6817 of 1993 -2-
of 60 years. Reliance has also been placed upon the judgment
passed by this Court in C.W.P. No.5605 of 1992, decided on
1.2.1993, in which the following observations have been made:-
” After hearing the counsel for the parties, we find that
law with regard to the age of superannuation of Class IV
employees (inferior employees) of the erstwhile State of
Pepsu being 60 years instead of 58 years, stands
already settled by a number of decisions of this Court as
well as of Hon’ble Supreme Court of India. Some of
them are cited as under:-
1. R.S.A. No.902 of 1965 – State of Punjab Vs.
Bachan Singh driver – decided on 30.11.65.
2. R.S.A. No.1355 of 1974 – State of Pb. Vs. Atma
Singh decided on 10.2.1981.
3. C.W.P. No.6541 of 1986 – Niranjan Singh Vs.
State of Punjab – decided on 27.11.1989.
4. C.W.P. No.3162 of 1987- Bakhtawar Ram Vs.
State of Punjab – decided on 5.10.87.
5. C.W.P. No.4329 of 1976 – Decided on 3.3.83.
6. R.S.A. No.2163 of 1988 decided on 13.9.88 – Pb.
State Vs. Raghbir Chand Carpenter.
The present writ petition is also squarely covered by the
law laid down in the aforesaid decisions. Accordingly we
allow the petition in the same terms directing the
respondents to permit the petitioner to continue in
service till he attains the age of 60 years.”
No reply has been filed by the respondents controverting
the averments made in the present petition or disputing the
proposition of law.
Accordingly, the present petition is accepted on the
parity of the reasons given in squarely covered petition i.e. C.W.P.
Civil Writ Petition No.6817 of 1993 -3-
No.5605 of 1992. The writ petition is allowed and the respondents
are directed to grant the petitioner, the benefit of two years service
and also grant him consequent pensionary benefits by treating the
age of the retirement of the petitioner as 60 years.
19th November, 2009. (MAHESH GROVER) Monika JUDGE