High CourtsSingle Bench(2014) 03 P&H CK 0205

Gurnam Singh Gill vs State of Punjab and Others

Punjab And Haryana At Chandigarh · Decided on 3 March 2014 · Citation: (2014) LLR 397

HON’BLE JUDGES
Gurmeet Singh Sandhawalia, J
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
C.W.P. No. 7976/2006

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

3 paragraphs · 274 words

Gurmeet Singh Sandhawalia, J.—Challenge in the present writ petition is to the order dated 22.11.2005 (Annexure P/3) whereby the Appellate Authority issued notice to the petitioner on an appeal filed by respondent No. 4-Punjab State Electricity Board against the order passed by respondent No. 3-Controlling Authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972. The writ petition was admitted and ordered to be heard with Civil Writ Petition No. 5126 of 2004. The said case was decided by a Division Bench of this Court and reported as Balwant Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab . It was held that in view of the notification issued by the State Government granting exemption to the Board, the gratuity is not liable to be paid to the employees of the Board.

2.

Counsel for the petitioner, however, submits that the matter is pending before the Apex Court and therefore, hearing of the present petition be deferred. The said submission is without any basis. This petition has been filed against the notice received by the petitioner pertaining to the appeal filed before the Appellate Authority by the Electricity Board. The writ petition, thus, itself is not maintainable as the Appellate Authority is to yet decide the issue. Accordingly, there is no ground to interfere with the summons regarding the pendency of an appeal.

3.

However, it would be open to the petitioner to file an appropriate application before the Appellate Authority bringing to its that the issue is pending before the Hon''ble Apex Court and it would be open to the said authority to take a decision on the sai d application. Accordingly, the present petition is dismissed.