JUDGMENT :

HARPREET SINGH BRAR, J.

1. Present petition has been preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing of the order dated 13.12.2023 (Annexure P-7), vide which less retiral benefits including pay, arrears of GPF, leave encashment and pension were released in view of pendency of a criminal case and further to issue a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to release full retiral benefits to the petitioner.

2. On 02.02.2026, following order was passed by this Court: -

“Learned counsel for the petitioner, inter alia, contends that the petitioner retired on 31.08.2020 from the post of Clerk. During his service period, a false FIR No.59 dated 16.04.2011 under Section 409 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 was registered against him, in which, on 27.10.2012, cancellation report was submitted and the same was accepted by learned Judicial Magistrate 1^st Class, Moga on 28.03.2019, prior to retirement of the petitioner, as discernible from the order (Annexure P-2). Despite judicial closure of the criminal case, the respondents withheld retiral benefits of the petitioner. Feeling aggrieved, the petitioner filed a writ petition i.e. CWP-4364-2021 and vide order dated 24.02.2021 (Annexure P-5), this Court disposed of the same and directed the competent authority to decide his representation dated 04.11.2020 (Annexure P-4) within a period of two months from the date of receipt of certified copy of that order. Instead of complying with the directions issued by this Court vide order dated 24.02.2021 (Annexure P-5), the respondents coerced the petitioner to submit an affidavit (Annexure P-6) undertaking not to pursue the legal remedies as a pre-condition for releasing his dues. Despite that, retiral benefits of the petitioner are still not released. Further, a speaking order dated 13.12.2023 (Annexure P-7) was passed, vide which two departmental inquiries conducted during service period of the petitioner, which were pending for conclusion, were considered as concluded and decided not to proceed further. As such, there is no embargo in releasing retiral dues of the petitioner.

A perusal of the speaking order (Annexure P-7) clearly indicates that the matter has attained finality on 13.12.2023 and the petitioner is compelled to approach this Court by way of filing the present petition. This is 4^th date in the urgents.

Learned counsel for respondent No.5 seeks further adjournment.

In view of the above, respondent No.1 is directed to file his affidavit as to why in spite of passing of the speaking order (Annexure P-7) on 13.12.2023 by respondent No.2, retiral dues of the petitioner have not been released till date.

List again on 17.02.2026.”

3. In purported compliance of the aforesaid order, learned State counsel as well as learned counsel for the respondent-MC have filed short replies by way of affidavits of Manjeet Singh Brar, Secretary to Government of Punjab, Department of Local Government, Punjab and Jaspinder Singh, Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Moga-respondent No.2, respectively, in the Court today, which are taken on record and copies thereof have been supplied to learned counsel for the petitioner.

4. Learned State counsel as well as learned counsel for the respondent-MC submit that all the admissible dues have been paid to the petitioner and only the amount of Rs.3.40 lakhs has been withheld on the basis of affidavit (Annexure P-6) furnished by him. As such, a lenient view was taken.

5. In rebuttal, learned counsel for the petitioner refers to the impugned order dated 13.12.2023 (Annexure P-7) and submits that two chargesheets were issued on 09.02.2001 and 09.05.2018, which were never taken to their logical conclusion, as the disciplinary proceedings were not ended in passing of any punishment order till date. Further, after retirement of the petitioner on 31.08.2020, when he was in dire need of his retiral benefits, an undertaking was obtained