G. C. Mital, J. - (1.) Pritam Singh petitioner was employed as a Patwari in the State of Punjab from which post he retired in Dec., 1964 on attaining the age of superannuation The petitioner belongs to Ropar Sub - Division and at the time of retirement was serving as a Patwari in that very Sub - Division in village Surtapar Bara. On his retirement he applied to the Deputy Commissioner, Ambala for, determination and grant of pension and gratuity as at that time the Sub - Division of Ropar came under Ambala district While the matter was being processed the reorganisation of the States of Punjab and Haryana took place on 1st Nov., 1966 with the result that Ropar Sub - Division fell in the State of Punjab, whereas the remaining subdivisions of Ambala district fell within the territory if newly created Haryana State. After the reorganisation the petitioner tried his level best to get his case of pension etc. decided either by the State of Punjab or by the State of Haryana and kept on reminding Deputy Commissioner, Ambala and Deputy Commissioner, Ropar which was formed into a district after the reorganization, but none of the two Governments through their concerned officers decided the case of the petitioner nor it was ever conveyed that his claim is declined and on the other hand he was given assurances from time to time that the matter is being finalised because each State was putting the liability on the other. Ultimately by a letter dated 3rd Sept., 1979 (annexure P - 2) Deputy Commissioner, Roopnagar (earlier known as Ropar) informed the petitioner that since be retired In Dec., 1964 while he was pouted in erstwhile Ambala District, he should correspond with Deputy Commissioner, Ambala. Thereafter the petitioner served notices under section 80 of the Code of Civil Procedure on both the States and on receipt of the notice, petitioner was again informed by Deputy Commissioner, Roopnagar, that he should approach Deputy Commissioner, Ambala vide letter dated 16th Jan., 1980 (Annexure P. 4) Since the petitioner was advised that under section 58 of the Punjab Reorganization Act, 1966 (hereinafter called the Act) read with para 2 of the 14th Schedule, it would be the liability of the State Government is respect of pension of officers serving in connection with the affairs of the existing State of Punjab who retired before the appointed date end therefore, the State of Punjab alone was liable to pay his pension, he came to this Court under Art. 226 of the Constitution of "India for the issuance of an appropriate writ or direction and impleaded both the States in the writ petition.
(2.) The State of Haryana has filed written statement and has stated that the stand of the petitioner that the State of Punjab would be liable to pay his pension etc in view of Sec. 58 of the Act read with para 2 of 14th Schedule is correct However, the State of Punjab has not filed any reply, although appearance was put in on its behalf, The learned counsel appearing for the State of Punjab sought two adjournments to file the written statement and inspite of that no written statement has been filed. Therefore, there it no option with me but to proceed with the case specially when the claim of the petitioner is hanging fire since 1965.
(3.) After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, I am of the view that the claim of the petitioner for grant of pension from ins State of Punjab is unexceptional. A reading of section 58 of the Act read with para 2 of the Schedule, would show that the liability of the officers working before 1st Nov., 1966, the appointed date, would be of the existing State of Punjab i.e the State of Punjab before Organisation and for that matter, the State of Punjab alone would be liable to make payment of the pension to the petitioner. If there is any Inter se dispute between the State of Punjab and Haryana in regard to the apportionment thereof that has to be gone into by the States themselves, but the petitioner cannot be allowed to wait for the inter se dispute specially on the facts on this case when 16 years have already passed by and no settlement has been arrived at between the States. A reading of letters Exs P-2 and P-4 shows that the State of Punjab is netting the burden on the State of Haryana through Deputy Commissioner, Ambala and therefore, shows the Intention of the State of Punjab not to honour its liability.;