MOTI RAM GUPTA, EX Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The learned counsel for the petitoiner has confined his prayer only to the release of the leave encashment benefits to the petitioner. The petitioner filed representation which was declined vide letter Annexure P-8 without giving any reason. Since the impugned order does not contain any reason, I direct respondent No. 2 to treat this writ petition as a representation and decide it in the light of the decision contained in Amar Singh Vs. Cheif Secretary, Punjab and others, 1986(1) S.L.R. 686 and C.W.P. No. 5433 of 1987 decided on Feb. 1, 1988. If it is found that the petitioner is entitled to the benefit, the same will be released to him within one month from the date of the order of entitlement. There shall be no order as to costs. Order accordingly