Rabinder Kum er Kumar Singla itioner v. State of Punja f Punjab and others
Case Details
1 CWP WP-2907-2024 N THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJA IN TH AT CHANDIGA DIGARH NJAB AND HARYANA 253 CWP- -2907-2024 Date of , 2025 ate of Decision: September 17, 2025 Rabinder Kum er Kumar Singla itioner .....Petitioner SUS VERSUS State of Punja f Punjab and others .....Responden ondents CORAM:
Legal Reasoning
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HA HARPREET SINGH BRAR Present : Mr. J.K. Singla, Advocate for the for the petitioner. unjab. Mr. Vikas Sonak, AAG, Punjab. Mr. Sarthak Gupta, Advocate for **** ate for respondent No.4. HARPREET REET SINGH BRAR, J. (Oral) 1. The present writ petition has be 6/227 has been filed under Article 226/227 of the Consti Constitution of India 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 grant/pay interest on delayed nefits elayed payment of retirement benefits i.e. Gratuity atuity and Leave Encashment in view by a view of the judgment rendered by a Full Bench ench of this Court in “A.S Randhawa Vs. hawa, Supdg. Engineer (Retd.) Vs State of Pun Punjab 1997(3) PLR 6” as well a tation well as to decide the representation dated 11.07.2 1.07.2023(Annexure P-18) moved by ed by the petitioner 2. Learned counsel for the petition the petitioner inter alia contends that the petitioner joi joined the services of respondent 80 as ndent No.4-Board on 14.03.1980 as Junior Engine Engineer and continued to work there .1999, there till 31.03.1999. On 01.04.1999, PUNEET CHAWLA 2025.09.23 14:12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 2 CWP WP-2907-2024 the petitioner itioner was absorbed in the Departme ndent partment of Local Bodies-respondent No.3-M.C Ba .C Bathinda. He ultimately retired f on tired from service on 28.02.2019, on attaining the g the age of superannuation. After hi all his his retirement, he received all his retiral dues dues from the office of respondent ration, ondent No.3-Municipal Corporation, Bathinda exc except for the payment towards gra nt for rds gratuity and leave encashment for the period fro iod from 14.03.1980 to 31.03.1999 am The 999 amounting to Rs.11,05,622/-. The petitioner sub ner submitted various representations l dues tations for release of his retiral dues towards gratu s gratuity and leave encashment but to more to no avail. After a delay of more than one an ne and half years, respondent No.4 yment t No.4-Board released the payment towards grat gratuity and leave encashment on .2020, ent on 16.03.2020 and 14.07.2020 respectively tively, without any interest. Learned that earned counsel further submits that during the service the tenure of petitioner linary tioner, no inquiry or disciplinary proceedings . dings were ever initiated against him. 3. Learned counsel further contend ntitled ontends that the petitioner is entitled to interest on on account of the delayed paymen ms of ayment of his retiral dues in terms of the judgment gment rendered by a Full Bench of awa ch of this Court in A.S. Randhawa Supg. Engin ngineer (Retd.) vs. State of Punjab rein it njab 1998 (1) SCT 343 wherein it was opined pined that disbursement of pension ble at nsion and other benefits payable at retirement mu ent must be done in a timely manner. of two anner. Any delay over a period of two months, qua s, qua the said disbursement would ee to ould entitle the retired employee to claim interes nterest on the amount due. Speaking hi, the aking through Justice N.K. Sodhi, the following wa ing was held: “9. Si immed Pensio disbur . Since a Government employee mediately entitled to pension and nsion Rules, a duty is simultaneousl sbursement of pension and other b oyee on his retirement becomes mes and other benefits in terms of the the the ously cast on the State to ensure the oper er benefits to the retirer in proper PUNEET CHAWLA 2025.09.23 14:12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 3 CWP WP-2907-2024 time. circum month down the Sta denyin there i and, in interes the da interes circum rate wh 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%.” and e will depend on the facts and normally it would not exceed two two laid ent which time limit has been laid ). If admanabhan Nair's case (supra). If the performance of its duty thereby reby ney, of the immediate use of his money, ated t he gets a right to be compensated to compensate him is to pay him him on n the amount as was due to him on e of , as to what should be the rate 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. 4. On the other hand, learned coun ubmit counsel for the respondent(s) submit that the retira e retiral dues have already been paid t they paid to the petitioner. However, they could not co not controvert the applicability of A. in A.S. Randhawa’s case (supra) in the present ca sent case. 5. Having heard the submission m or the sion made by learned counsel for the parties and a and after perusing the record with th spires ith their able assistance, it transpires that the amou e amount due to the petitioner towards hment wards gratuity and leave encashment was disbursed sbursed to him one and a half years aft ars after his retirement. 6. Therefore, the present petition
Decision
tion to is disposed of with a direction to the responde pondent(s)/competent authority to pay on to pay interest @ 6% per annum on the amount d ount disbursed in lieu of gratuity and ew of ity and leave encashment, in view of A.S. Randha ndhawa’s case (supra). The same two same shall be calculated from two months after aft his retirement ill till its it actual The realization. The PUNEET CHAWLA 2025.09.23 14:12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 4 CWP WP-2907-2024 respondent(s) dent(s)/competent authority is directe in 03 directed to do the needful within 03 months of rec s of receipt of a certified copy of this o this order. 7. Pending miscellaneous applicat stands plication(s), if any, shall also stands ed of. disposed of. RAR) (HARPREET SINGH BRAR) JUDGE September 1 P.C ber 17, 2025 Whether speaking/reasoned. : Whether Reportable. : Yes/No Yes/No PUNEET CHAWLA 2025.09.23 14:12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document