SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(P&H) 1843

PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH
Namit Kumar, J.
Mohan Lal – Appellant 
Versus  
State Of Punjab And Others – Respondent
CWP-9405-2016
Decided on : 21-08-2024

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :Mr. Manoj Kumar, Advocate with Ms. Mehak Sharma, Advocate
For the Respondent:Mr. Teevar Sharma, AAG, Punjab; Ms. Farheen Bajwa, Advocate for Mr. Harsh Aggarwal, Mr. Sudhir Paruthi, Advocate

JUDGMENT :

Namit Kumar, J. -

The petitioner has approached this Court by way of filing the instant writ petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ of mandamus, directing the respondents to release all the retiral benefits accrued to the petitioner on his retirement such as gratuity, commutation, remaining leave encashment, provident fund etc. along with interest @ 18% per annum till its realization.

2. Brief facts of the case, as have been pleaded in the present petition, are that the petitioner was appointed as Surveyor in Municipal Corporation, Amritsar in the year 1978. Thereafter, he was promoted to the post of Junior Engineer and further to the post of Assistant Town Planner in the year 2002 and retired as such on attaining the age of superannuation on 31.12.2010. During his service tenure, when the petitioner was posted at Municipal Corporation, Ludhiana, a case FIR No.l dated 20.01.2005 under Sections 420, 465, 467, 468, 471 and 120B IPC and under Section 13(1)(D) read with Section 13(2)/88 of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 in Police Station Vigilance Bureau, Ludhiana was registered against him and due to pendency of said case, at the time of his retirement, he was released only partial leave encashment and provident fund upto 90% and the other retiral benefits were withheld by the Corporation. Therafter, vide judgment dated 24.07.2014 passed by learned Special Judge, Ludhiana, the petitioner was acquitted in the abovesaid case. After his acquittal, the petitioner submitted a letter dated 11.09.2014 to the respondents requesting them for releasing his retiral dues. Vide memo dated 22.01.2015, the petitioner received a copy of communication between State Government and Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Jalandhar, wherein it was mentioned that immediate action be taken on the request of the petitioner for releasing of his retiral dues. The petitioner again submitted a letter dated 29.06.2015 seeking information with regard to releasing of his retiral dues and the same was responded by the Public Information Officer, M.T.P. Department, Municipal Corporation, Jalandhar through letter dated 24.07.2015, wherein it was informed that the required record has not been sent by the State Government to the Municipal Corporation, Jalandhar. When the retiral dues were not released to the petitioner, he served legal notice dated 13.01.2016 to the respondents through his counsel to release the retiral dues of the petitioner within a period of one month but to no avail. Hence, this petition.

3. Pursuant to order dated 28.03.2022 passed by this Court, an affidavit of Sh. Rajesh Khokhar, Assistant Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Jalandhar, on behalf of respondent No.4, has been filed. In the said affidavit, it has been stated as under :-

"xx xx xx xx xx

2. That the petitioner after attaining the age of superannuation was retired on 31.12.2010 from the post of the Assistant Town Planner. That a criminal case bearing FIR No.l dated 20.01.2005 under Section 467/468/471 read with Section 120-B IPC was lodged against the petitioner at Ludhiana. That the service book of the petitioner and related documents were sent to the Government (respondent No.2) as required by the Govt, vide letter dated 16.01.2013. The copy of the letter dated 16.01.2013 is already attached with earlier reply of the respondent No. 4 as Annexure R-4/1.

3. That the petitioner was acquitted by the Special Judge Ludhiana vide order dated 24.07.2014. That the deponent requested the Govt, time and again to send the service record and No Objection Certificate relating to the petitioner so that retiral benefits could be released. Copies of the letters issued by the deponent (respondent no 4) are already on the record with the earlier reply as annexure R-4/2, R-4/3, R-4/4 and R-4/5. That the record of the petitioner was sent back to the respondent no. 4 vide letter dated 21.07.2016 but No Objection Certificate was not issued and in the absence

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top