A claimant is barred from seeking relief under Article 226 due to inordinate delay and laches, which denies any revival of stale claims.

JUDGMENT :

HARPREET SINGH BRAR, J.

1. Prayer in this writ petition filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, is for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari, for quashing the impugned order dated 13.05.2024 (Annexure P-14) passed by respondent No.2, whereby the claim of the petitioner seeking compassionate allowance has been rejected. Further prayer has been made to consider the claim of the petitioner for grant of compassionate pension in view of Rule 2.5 of the PUNJAB CIVIL SERVICES RULES, by taking into account total length of service of the petitioner.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner, inter alia, contends that the petitioner was appointed as Assistant Lineman in the erstwhile Punjab State Electricity Board (now, Punjab State Power Corporation Limited) on 14.03.1985. The petitioner has rendered 30 years of service before his dismissal on account of his conviction in terms of the judgment dated 07.03.2001 rendered by learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Fatehgarh Sahib. He challenged the dismissal order by filing CWP-18760-2005, however, the said petition was dismissed by the Division Bench of this Court on 14.11.2007 and consequently, vide letter dated 16.01.2008, the petitioner was ordered to be relieved from service. The genesis of the dispute is with regard to a private property dispute between the petitioner and legal heirs of Jassu Ram. The petitioner had purchased a property from one Jassu Ram, which was challenged by filing a civil suit by legal heirs of Jassu Ram. The civil suit filed by legal heirs of Jassu Ram was dismissed by the Civil Court on 12.08.2016 (Annexure P-7) and the appeal preferred against the said judgment was also dismissed by the Additional District Judge, S.A.S. Nagar, Mohali on 05.02.2020 (Annexure P-8), establishing the validity of the petitioner’s title. He further submits that the conviction of the petitioner was also modified by this Court in CRR-963-2005 and as such, the petitioner is entitle to the benefits of compassionate allowance or pension in terms of Rule 2.5 of the PUNJAB CIVIL SERVICES RULES,Volume II. The conviction of the petitioner was not for an offence involving moral turpitude or departmental misconduct. The respondents are bound to exercise the discretion in terms of Rule 2.5 of the PUNJAB CIVIL SERVICES RULES,by considering the petitioner’s 30 years of long service and he is facing financial hardship and is having no other source of sustenance. He further contends that the petitioner also approached this Court by filing a petition i.e. CWP-28229-2023, which was disposed of on 19.12.2023 with a direction to respondent No.2 therein to decide the legal notice dated 02.01.2022, by passing a speaking order. In purported compliance, the claim of the petitioner was rejected vide impugned order dated 13.05.2024 (Annexure P-14) passed by respondent No.2.

3. Per contra, learned State counsel as well as learned counsel appearing for respondents No.2 to 4, appearing on advance notice, submits that the dismissal of the petitioner has attained finality when his writ petition was dismissed by this Court on 14.11.2007. The right to claim compassionate pension or allowance and other benefits in terms of Rule 2.5 of the PUNJAB CIVIL SERVICES RULES,crystallized and accrued to the petitioner in the year 2007 whereas he has approached this Court by filing a petition i.e. CWP-25945-2021, in the year 2021, which was dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to the petitioner to pursue his representation in accordance with law. As such, the stale claim of the petitioner cannot be revived merely because this Court had directed to conside