IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 112 CWP-29281-2026 Date of decision : 10.09.2026 Uttam Singh ....Petitioner Versus The Punjab State Cooperative Supply and Marketing Federation Limited ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAMIT KUMAR Present: Mr. Lovedev Singh, Advocate with Mr. Shiv Kumar, Advocate for the petitioner. NAMIT KUMAR J. (Oral) 1. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, seeking issuance of a writ mandamus directing the respondents to determine, finalize and release/disburse to the petitioner all lawful retiral and consequential service benefits, including arrears arising out of proper refixation/revision of pay in accordance with the continuity of service granted vide revisional order dated 16.09.1991 (Annexure P-9) which was upheld by this Court, vide order dated 23.03.1994, passed in CWP- 333-1992 (Annexure P-11), along with leave encashment, refund of security amount, refund of amounts, if any, illegally deducted/recovered from the petitioner’s salary or retiral dues and all other admissible service/retiral benefits, particularly in view of the dismissal of the recovery proceedings initiated by the respondent-Markfed under Section 55/56 of the Punjab Cooperative Societies Act, 1961, which proceedings have attained finality in terms of the judgment dated 05.08.2026 passed by this Court in LPA-919-2023 (Annexure P-8), together with interest @ 18% per annuam on the respective amounts from the date the same became due till the date of actual realization. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that for redressal of his grievances, the petitioner has also submitted representation dated VINOD KOTHIYAL 2026.09.10 16:45 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document CWP-29281-2026 -2- 30.07.2025 (Annexure P-20) to the respondent which is still pending consideration. He further submits that at this stage, the petitioner would be satisfied, if the petitioner may be given liberty to supplement the abovesaid representation and appropriate directions are issued to the respondent to consider and decide the same, by passing a speaking order, in a time bound manner. 3. Notice of motion restricted. 4. Mr. Abhilaksh Gaind, Mr. Rakesh Roy, and Ms. Priya Tarial, Advocates have put in appearance and accept notice on behalf of the respondent-Markfed. They have no objection to the innocuous prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record of the case. 6. Without going into the merits of the case at this stage, the present petition is disposed of with a liberty to the petitioner to supplement the representation dated 30.07.2025 (Annexure P-20) within a period of two weeks from today and the respondent is directed to consider and decide the said representation expeditiously, by passing a speaking order after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, preferably within a period of 04 months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. Further, the decision taken thereon shall be conveyed to the petitioner. Needless to say, if the petitioner is found entitled to the due benefits, the same shall be released to him within a period of 01 month thereafter with reasonable rate of interest. (NAMIT KUMAR) 10.09.2026 JUDGE kothiyal Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether reportable: Yes/No VINOD KOTHIYAL 2026.09.10 16:45 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document