IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 243 CWP-14103-2018 Date of Decision: 29.04.2025 Gejjo ...Petitioner Versus Controlling Authroity and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI Present:- Mr. Rajeev K. Kapila, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Malkiat Singh, Sr. DAG, Punjab. ***** HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI , J. (ORAL) 1. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was wrongly advised to avail the remedy, where the relief has been declined vide order dated 21.11.2017 (Annexure P-1), whereas, the claim of the petitioner for pensionery benefits under the Old Pension Scheme is covered by the judgement of the Division Bench of this Court in CWP-2371-2010, decided on 30th August, 2010, titled as ‘Harbans Lal versus State of Punjab. Hence, the present petition may kindly be disposed of as having been not pressed any further with liberty to avail a remedy from the concerned authority to seek pension under the Old Pension Scheme keeping in view the service rendered by the petitioner. 2. Ordered accordingly. ( HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI) JUDGE April 29, 2025 Nisha-1 Whether speaking/reasoned Yes Whether reportable No NISHA 2025.04.30 18.33 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document