The High Court
Case Details
1 CWP-1463- -2023 and CWP-4479-2023 (O&M (O&M) N THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJA IN TH NJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIG ANDIGARH cases) 247(2 cases) CWP-1463-2023 CW , 2025 Date of Decision: August 25, 2025 Dat 1. Jagdev Singh Saini and others Jagdev SUS VERSUS .....Petitioner ioners Punjab State Cooperative Supply and M Punjab others and Marketing Federation and others 2. Sandeep Puri and others Sandee .....Responden ondents CW CWP-4479-2023(O&M) SUS VERSUS .....Petitioner ioners Punjab State Cooperative Supply and M Punjab others and Marketing Federation and others .....Responden ondents CORAM:
Legal Reasoning
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HA HARPREET SINGH BRAR Present : Mr. Brijesh, Advocate for the pe the petitioner(s). Mr. M.S Virk, Advocate for re 2023. 1463- respondent No.1- in CWP-1463 Mr. Shekhar Verma, ADvocate w Rahul Chadha, Advocates for r 2023. d Mr. ocate with Ms. Deepti Singh and Mr. 4479- s for respondent No.1 in CWP-4479 Mr. Vikas Arora, DAG Punjab- -State. **** HARPREET REET SINGH BRAR, J. (Oral) CM-16819- 2023. -CWP-2023 in CWP-4479-2023. The present application has been of the as been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution tution of India read with Order 1 Rul ection 1 Rule 10 of CPC read with Section PUNEET CHAWLA 2025.08.28 11:15 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 2 CWP-1463- -2023 and CWP-4479-2023 (O&M (O&M) 151 of CPC p CPC praying for impleading the appli to 16 e applicants as petitioners No.13 to 16 for the reason reasoned mentioned in the application ication. At this stage, learned counsel es to ounsel for the petitioners wishes to withdraw the aw the present application with libert on on liberty to file fresh writ petition on behalf of app of applicants. In view of the above, the pres sed as e present application is dismissed as withdrawn w with liberty aforesaid. Main Case 1. This order of mine shall dispos d writ dispose of the above-mentioned writ petitions as th ns as they arise from a similar factual m ake of ctual matrix. However, for the sake of brevity, the fa , the facts are taken from CWP-1463 1463-2023. 2. The present writ petition has bee of the as been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution tution of India, 1950 with a prayer for e writ, er for issuance of an appropriate writ, order or dire or directions especially in the natur g the nature of mandamus directing the respondents t dents to release the gratuity of the pe eiling the petitioners at the revised ceiling limit i.e. Rs. .e. Rs.20,00,000/- and to pay interest to the nterest at the rate of 18% p.a. to the petitioners fr ners from the date of filing of the in g the the instant petition for delaying the payment of g nt of gratuity at the revised ceiling lim ng limit. 3. Learned counsel for the respon ts that espondent(s)-Federation submits that grievance rai ce raised by the petitioners with regar ty has h regard to releasing their gratuity has been substan ubstantially redressed and further sub rcular her submits that in terms of circular dated 21.09.2 1.09.2023 enhanced amount has alrea issue s already been paid and the only issue surviving is w ng is with regard to the interest on ac ng the t on account of delay in releasing the gratuity. PUNEET CHAWLA 2025.08.28 11:15 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 3 CWP-1463- -2023 and CWP-4479-2023 (O&M (O&M) 4. Learned counsel for the petition petitioner submits that the petitioner ioners are entitled t titled to the interest on the delayed a in ayed amount towards retiral dues in terms of the of the judgment rendered by a Full S. a Full Bench of this Court in A.S Randhawa S wa Supg. Engineer (Retd.) vs. State 343 State of Punjab 1998 (1) SCT 343 wherein it w n it was opined that disbursement nefits ment of pension and other benefits payable at re e at retirement must be done in a tim ver a a timely manner. Any delay over a period of two of two months, qua the said disburse etired isbursement would entitle the retired employee to ee to claim interest on the amount ustice ount due. Speaking through Justice N.K. Sodhi, t odhi, the following was held: “9. Si immed Pensio disbur time. circum month down the Sta denyin there i and, in interes the da interes circum rate wh . Since a Government employee mediately entitled to pension and nsion Rules, a duty is simultaneousl sbursement of pension and other b e. As to what is proper time w rcumstances of each case but norm onths from the date of retirement wn by the Apex Court in M. Padma e State commits any default in the p nying to the retiree the benefit of th ere is no gainsaying the fact that he in our opinion, the only way to terest for the period of delay on the e date of his retirement. Again, as terest, it should, in our view, rcumstances of a particular case wa te which may extend to even 18%.” oyee on his retirement becomes mes and other benefits in terms of the the the ously cast on the State to ensure the er benefits to the retirer in proper oper e will depend on the facts and and two normally it would not exceed two laid ent which time limit has been laid admanabhan Nair's case (supra). If ). If reby the performance of its duty thereby ney, of the immediate use of his money, t he gets a right to be compensated ated him to compensate him is to pay him on n the amount as was due to him on , as to what should be the rate of e of the the w, be generally 12% unless gher e warrant the payment of a higher ”(emphasis added) Reliance in this regard may also be pla Relian dered placed on the judgments rendered by the Hon Hon’ble Supreme Court in S.K. Dua 8) 3 Dua vs. State of Haryana (2008) 3 SCC 44 and and State of Kerala vs. M. Padmana anabhan Nair (1985) 1 SCC 429. 5. Learned counsel for not he respondents-Federation did not the res controvert u vert upon the judgments relied by r the ed by the learned counsel for the petitioners an s and made a submission before t t writ fore this Court that the present writ PUNEET CHAWLA 2025.08.28 11:15 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 4 CWP-1463- -2023 and CWP-4479-2023 (O&M (O&M) petitions can
Decision
can be disposed of in terms of the j and f the judgments A.S. Randhawa and S.K. Dua (su (supra). 6. I have heard the learned counse ell as counsel for the petitioners as well as the responden pondents and it transpires that the dela easing he delay has been caused in releasing the retiral due ral dues by the respondent-Federation ration. 7. In view of the above submissio el for mission made by learned counsel for the responden pondent(s), the present petition is disp to the disposed of with a direction to the respondent(s) dent(s)/competent authority to pay th mount pay the interest on delayed amount towards retira retiral benefits from the date of filing at filing of the present writ petitions at the rate of 7.5 of 7.5% p.a in terms of the judgments Dua gments A.S. Randhawa and S.K. Dua (supra) with within a period of two months fr g the ths from the date of receiving the certified copy d copy of this order. 8. Pending miscellaneous applicat stands plication(s), if any, shall also stands ed of. disposed of. 9. Photocopy of this order be pl ected be placed on the file of connected cases. RAR) (HARPREET SINGH BRAR) JUDGE August 25, 2 P.C , 2025 Whether speaking/reasone Whether Reportable. : easoned. : Yes/No Yes/No PUNEET CHAWLA 2025.08.28 11:15 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document