PURAN CHANDER Vs. PUNJAB STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER , who voluntarily retired vide his request dated 10.2.1995 and whose request to the effect aforesaid was accepted, as conceded in the written statement, seeks pension and other post - retiral benefits.

(2.) PETITIONER , for the twin reliefs, as referred to above, relies upon a judgment of this Court in Ganga Bishan v. State of Haryana and others, 1994(4) SLR 59 : 1994(3) SCT 154 (P&H), which squarely covers his case.

(3.) THE counsel representing the respondent Board, however, endeavours to contest the claim of the petitioner on the side ground that the petitioner was wrongfully retired. In other words, the concerned authority should not have accepted his request for retirement. It is pertinent to mention here that while making his request vide Annexure P -2, dated 10.2.1995, the petitioner had clearly mentioned that "he had also submitted an application with regard to the insertion of W/C TM service for the purpose of getting pension and other benefits and the same may be settled on or before the ending day of this notice so that he might not feel any difficulty thereafter." This request of the petitioner vide Annexure P -2 dated 10.2.1995 for grant of pension and other post -retiral benefits was accepted by the respondents. it is too late now in the day to say that the concerned authority should not have retired the petitioner. If that be so and if some action is required to be taken against the concerned authority, that may be taken but insofar as the petitioner is concerned, he has to be given post -retiral benefits as per rules and judgment of this Court in Ganga Bishan's case (supra). Before I part with this order, I would like to mention that to a pertinent question put to the counsel for the Board that if the petitioner was wrongfully retired, whether the Board was prepared to take the petitioner back in service with continuity of service and back wages, the counsel has chosen rather not to answer.