IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT 253 Raksha Malik State of Punjab and others CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMAN CHAUDHARY Present: Mr. Mr. Satnam Preet Singh, DAG, Punjab *** AMAN CHAUDHARY, J. (Oral) 1. Prayer made in the present petition for directing the respondents to revise the pension of the petitioner. 2. Learned State counsel refers to pa to which no rebuttal by way of replication and reads thus: 3. D case lis still subsists 28.04.2025 ashok Whether speaking/reasoned : Whether reportable : IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-9995 Date of decision: 28.04.2025 Raksha Malik Versus State of Punjab and others HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMAN CHAUDHARY Mr. Surinder Garg, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Satnam Preet Singh, DAG, Punjab *** AMAN CHAUDHARY, J. (Oral) Prayer made in the present petition for directing the respondents to revise the pension of the petitioner. Learned State counsel refers to pa to which no rebuttal by way of replication and reads thus: “That revised pension case of the petitioner was returned by the respondent No.5 vide memo No.4469 stating therein that pension revision as per Government Notification No.4/13/2013 dated 02.08.2017 and further 18.09.2017 and 24.10.2017 is not beneficial to the retiree as she is already drawing pension at the higher rate i.e. Rs.7493/ Rs.6911/-. The copy of letter dated 03.12.2021 issued by the respondent No.5 is being appended as Annexure R1 for the kind consideration of this Hon’ble Court.” Disposed of reserving the petitioner with a liberty to get it revived in still subsists. ( AMAN CHAUDHARY ) Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 9995-2023 (O&M) Date of decision: 28.04.2025 ..Petitioner ..Respondents HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMAN CHAUDHARY , Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Satnam Preet Singh, DAG, Punjab. Prayer made in the present petition for directing the respondents to Learned State counsel refers to para 5 of the preliminary submission to which no rebuttal by way of replication and reads thus:- “That revised pension case of the petitioner was returned by the respondent No.5 vide memo No.4469-70 with a remark stating therein that pension revision as per Punjab Government Notification No.4/13/2013-1FPPC/1066963/1 dated 02.08.2017 and further 18.09.2017 and 24.10.2017 is not beneficial to the retiree as she is already drawing pension at the higher rate i.e. Rs.7493/- then the revised pension of he copy of letter dated 03.12.2021 issued by the respondent No.5 is being appended as Annexure R1 for the kind consideration of this Hon’ble Court.” isposed of reserving the petitioner with a liberty to get it revived in ( AMAN CHAUDHARY ) JUDGE Yes/No Yes/No Prayer made in the present petition for directing the respondents to ra 5 of the preliminary submission “That revised pension case of the petitioner was returned by 70 with a remark Punjab 1FPPC/1066963/1 dated 02.08.2017 and further 18.09.2017 and 24.10.2017 is not beneficial to the retiree as she is already drawing pension then the revised pension of he copy of letter dated 03.12.2021 issued by the respondent No.5 is being appended as Annexure R1 for the isposed of reserving the petitioner with a liberty to get it revived in ASHOK KUMAR 2025.05.01 16:15 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document