CWP-9636-2004 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA 738 Anil Kumar State of Punjab and CORAM: HON'BLE MR. Present : None for the petitioner. Mr. Satnam Preet Singh, DAG, Punjab AMAN CHAUDHARY, J. (ORAL) 1. Prayer made in the present petition for quashing the order 14.05.2001 and 09.05.2002 recovery was to be effected, which the Division Bench vide order dated 06.07.2004 had stayed. 2. Reliance dated 20.01.2004 passed in 891-2003, involving the same issue allowance and family pension, however, prayer in respect of recovery sought to be made was allowed Haryana, 1994(5) SLR 753 efforts has been thereof or cite any contrary law. 3. The present petition (supra). 22.04.2025 ashok Whether speaking/reasoned Whether reportable 2004(O&M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Versus State of Punjab and others HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMAN CHAUDHARY ***** None for the petitioner. Mr. Satnam Preet Singh, DAG, Punjab ***** AMAN CHAUDHARY, J. (ORAL) Prayer made in the present petition for quashing the order 14.05.2001 and 09.05.2002, Annexures P-4 and P recovery was to be effected, which the Division Bench vide order dated 06.07.2004 had stayed. eliance in the index of the present petition dated 20.01.2004 passed in the case Mukhtiar 2003, involving the same issue was though dismissed qua allowance and family pension, however, prayer in respect of recovery sought to be made was allowed by relying on the judgment in ca 1994(5) SLR 753 (SC), which fact learned State counsel despite best has been unable to controvert and resist disposal of the petition in terms thereof or cite any contrary law. The present petition is disposed (AMAN CHAUDHARY) Whether speaking/reasoned : Whether reportable : - 1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-9636-2004 (O&M) Date of decision: 22.04.2025 ....Petitioner ....Respondents JUSTICE AMAN CHAUDHARY Mr. Satnam Preet Singh, DAG, Punjab. Prayer made in the present petition for quashing the orders dated and P-5 whereby after refixation recovery was to be effected, which the Division Bench vide order dated present petition was placed on judgment Mukhtiar Singh vs. State of Punjab, CWP was though dismissed qua claim for dearness allowance and family pension, however, prayer in respect of recovery sought to be y relying on the judgment in case of Sahib Ram vs. State of which fact learned State counsel despite best unable to controvert and resist disposal of the petition in terms is disposed of in terms of Mukhtiar Singh (AMAN CHAUDHARY) JUDGE Yes / No Yes / No .2025 dated whereby after refixation recovery was to be effected, which the Division Bench vide order dated judgment , CWP- claim for dearness allowance and family pension, however, prayer in respect of recovery sought to be State of which fact learned State counsel despite best unable to controvert and resist disposal of the petition in terms Mukhtiar Singh ASHOK KUMAR 2025.04.23 15:01 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document