JUDGMENT

PARIPOORNAN, J.— Delay condoned. Leave granted.

2. The State of Haryana and the Accountant General, Respondents in Civil Writ Petition No. 9110 of 1993 in the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, are the appellants. The petitioner in the civil writ petition is the sole respondent herein. The prayer in the writ petition was for a declaration that the deduction of the alleged Government dues from DCRG (Death-cum-Retirement Gratuity) of the petitioner is illegal and for a direction in the nature of mandamus calling upon the respondents in the writ petition - the State of Haryana and the Accountant General - to refund the amount of Rs 24,996 along with interest at the rate of 18% per annum. By order dated 10-12-1993 the Division Bench of the High Court, comprising Honble Mr Justice M.R. Agnihotri and Honble Mr Justice B.S. Nehra, allowed the writ petition and directed the respondents in the writ petition to refund the amount of Rs 24,996, deducted by the State Government from the gratuity of the petitioner. Aggrieved by the aforesaid decision of the Division Bench the appellants have come up in appeal.

3. We heard counsel on both sides. The matter has a chequered history. The respondent, a retired Chief Engineer of the Irrigation Department in the Haryana State, was a senior responsible officer. He retired on 30-11-1989. While in service the respondent had availed of House Building Advance and Motor Car Advance loans against gratuity in the years 1973 and 1976. He had executed an agreement and had signed an undertaking that in case he fails to repay the loan, the same can be recovered from his gratuity with interest at the time of his retirement from the service. It seems that disciplinary proceedings were initiated against the respondent, which resulted in withholding of the outstanding retirement benefits. The respondent filed Civil Writ, Petition No. 12654 of 1990 and prayed for appropriate reliefs. A Division Bench of the High Court comprising of Mr Justice M.R. Agnihotri and Mr Justice K.P. Bhandari, directed the State of Haryana, Financial Commissioner and the Accountant General, the respondents in the writ petition, to release to the petitioner therein all pensionary benefits to which he was entitled to under the rules as the charges were not served on him before his retirement on attaining the age of superannuation. The judgment is dated 21-11-1990. Thereafter, the matter took a different turn. The respondent herein initiated proceedings in contempt for implementation of the judgment dated 21-11-1990. Finally, a learned Single Judge of the High Court passed the following order dated 28-4-1993 in the matter:

"The proposition of law is well settled that recovery of Government dues from a superannuated employee can be made from the gratuity. As such, the respondent-State was in its competence to deduct the Government dues from the gratuity of the petitioner. After deduction of the dues from the gratuity, the balance amount has been disbursed to the petitioner. In this view of the matter, this Courts order dated 21-11-1990 has been duly complied with.

COCP is accordingly dismissed. Rule discharged."

(emphasis supplied)

Thereafter, the respondent filed Writ Petition No. 9110 of 1993 and prayed for a declaration that the deduction of the Government dues amounting to Rs 24,996 from the DCRG amount is illegal and ultra vires and for a direction to refund the said amount along with interest at the rate of 18% per annum. In the writ petition the order appealed against was passed on 10-12-1993 by the Division Bench of the Punjab and Haryana High Court. The Division Bench opined that no inquiry is pending against the respondent nor any Government dues are to be realised from him and so there is no legal basis to make any deduction in the amount of gratuity payable and directed the appellants to refund a sum of Rs 24,996, deducted illegally by the State Government from the gratuity of the respondent. Aggrieved by the aforesaid judgment