IMPORTANT POINT
Exoneration from disciplinary proceedings allows entitlement to interest on delayed pension benefits.

JUDGMENT :

Mr. Harsimran Singh Sethi, J.

CM No. 16671-C-2016

Present application has been filed for seeking condonation of delay of 654 days in re-filing the appeal.

Keeping in view the averments made in the application, which are duly supported by an affidavit, the application is allowed and delay of 654 days in re-filing the appeal is condoned.

RSA-6355 of 2016

1. The present regular second appeal has been filed challenging the judgment and decree of the trial court dated 30.08.2012 as well as judgment and decree of the lower appellate court dated 06.10.2014 by which the appellant-plaintiff has not been granted the interest on the delayed release of the pensionary benefits.

2. Certain facts may be noticed for the correct appreciation of the issue in hand.

3. The appellant-plaintiff retired from service on attaining the age of superannuation on 30.04.2008. At the time when the appellant-plaintiff retired, a charge-sheet dated 22.03.2007 as well as another memorandum dated 23.06.2005 were pending consideration with the department. After the retirement of the appellant-plaintiff, another notice for recovery was served on 12.01.2009 due to which, pensionary benefits of the appellant-plaintiff such as leave encashment, gratuity and commutation pension was withheld.

4. It may be noticed that the charge-sheet dated 22.03.2007 was decided and a punishment of cut in pension @ 5% for three months was imposed on 31.12.2008. Qua the memorandum dated 23.06.2005, the said proceeding was disposed of with a simple warning to the appellant-plaintiff vide order dated 10.09.2009. With regard to the notice of recovery dated 12.01.2009, vide order dated 05.10.2011, a recovery of Rs.21,764/- was imposed on the appellant-plaintiff. Thereafter, the leave encashment, commutation of pension and gratuity were released on 16.11.2011, 21.02.2012 and 02.05.2012 respectively.

5. The appellant-plaintiff challenged the punishments imposed upon him by filing a civil suits and the punishment dated 31.12.2008 by which, 5% cut in pension for a period of three months was set-aside by a competent court of law vide judgment dated 22.10.2012. Similarly, the punishment of warning was also set-aside by the competent court of law on 22.10.2012. With regard to the recovery of Rs. 21,764/- as imposed vide order dated 05.10.2011 was also set-aside as the appellate authority had accepted the appeal filed against the said recovery.

6. Learned counsel for the appellant-plaintiff submits that after the punishments imposed upon him qua the charge-sheet, which were pending against the petitioner or issued after the retirement, the appellant-plaintiff has been exonerated, the appellant-plaintiff is also entitled for interest, which benefit has wrongly been denied by the respondents-defendants on the ground that the position is to be seen on the date of retirement and not thereafter, hence, the judgments and decrees of the courts below by which, the benefit of interest has been declined, are perverse to the settled principle of law.

7. Learned counsel for the respondents-defendants, on the other hand, submits that once the disciplinary proceedings were pending against the appellant-plaintiff on the date of retirement, the department was within the jurisdiction to withhold the certain pensionary benefits, which jurisdiction was exercised by the department and upon the culmination of those proceedings, the pensionary benefits were released to the appellantplaintiff, hence, the question of grant of interest on the delayed release of the pensionary benefits does not arise and the judgments and decrees of the courts below are perfectly valid and legal.

8. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record with their able assistance.

9. No doubt, as per the rules governing the service, an employee, who is facing disciplinary proceedings, the department is well within its jurisdiction to withhold certain pensionary benefits. In the present case also, withholding of the pen