$~14 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 7069/2017 & CM APPLs. 41456/2021, 31447/2023, 8696/2024, 75169/2024, 19920/2025, 11258-11259/2026 GURBACHAN SINGH CHHATWAL .....Petitioner Through: Appearance not given.

versus PUNJAB & SIND BANK .....Respondent Through: Mr. Rajat Arora and Mr. Sourabh Mahla, Advocates.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA

O R D E R

% 18.02.2026

1. This writ petition seeks a direction to Punjab & Sind Bank/Respondent No. 1 for payment of full pension and arrears thereof to the Petitioner, together with the full amount of gratuity along with interest from the date of his retirement. The petition further assails letters dated 1^st July, 2011 and 29^th January, 2014 whereby the Petitioner was denied payment of gratuity and was restricted to minimum pension, respectively.

2. During the pendency of the present proceedings, the Petitioner deceased. The writ petition is now being prosecuted by his wife, Smt.

Davinder Kaur, who has been brought on record as his legal representative.

3. The factual matrix necessary for adjudication of the present petition is that the Petitioner was serving as a Branch Manager with the Respondent Bank at its Branch Office in Sangha, District Bhatinda, Punjab. During his tenure at the said branch, between February and May 1987, certain advances were sanctioned by him, which subsequently turned into Non-Performing Assets. In connection therewith, an FIR came to be registered by the Respondent Bank, which was investigated by the CBI in RC No. 1/90. Apart from the criminal investigation, departmental proceedings were also initiated against the Petitioner and a chargesheet was issued to him.

4. According to the Petitioner, he was issued a chargesheet in the year 1989 culminating in an order of punishment passed by the Disciplinary Authority whereby six increments were reduced and his promotion was withheld for a period of three years. It is asserted that as a consequence thereof, his salary stood reduced by Rs. 500/- per increment, aggregating to Rs. 3,000/- per month.

5. The FIR bearing RC No. 1/90 was thereafter put to trial and, by judgment dated 12^th February, 1997, rendered by the CBI Court, the Petitioner was convicted under Section 420/120 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 read with Section 5(1) and 5 (i)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

6. Simultaneously, departmental action was undertaken against the Petitioner, culminating in the Disciplinary Authority imposing the major penalty of “compulsory retirement” in terms of Regulation 4(h) of the Punjab and Sind Bank Officer Employees (Discipline and Appeal)

Regulations, 1981, by order dated 20^th June, 2005.

7. In the aforesaid backdrop, the deceased Petitioner approached this Court seeking the following reliefs:

“[a] issue a writ, in the form of Mandamus & Certiorari, and order(s), quashing the denial for payment of gratuity vide Letter dated 01.07.2011 [Annexure P-1] to the petitioner and Letter dated 29.01.2014 denying full pension to the petitioner [Annexure P-2];

AND/OR [b] issue a writ, in the form of Mandamus directing the respondent bank to pay to the petitioner the full pension and arrears on account of the same from the date of retirement to the petitioner;

AND/OR [c] issue a writ, in the form of Mandamus directing the respondent pay the full amount of gratuity and the interest thereon from the date of retirement; AND/OR [d] grant the cost of the petition; AND/OR”

8. Insofar as the grievance relating to denial of gratuity is concerned, this Court, by order dated 15^th July, 2024, granted liberty to the Petitioner to avail appropriate remedies under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972. The relevant portion of the order is extracted:

“2. Late Gurbachan Singh Chhatwal expired during the pendency of the present writ petition and his legal heirs were brought on record. Insofar as payment of gratuity is concerned, learned counsel for the Petitioners, on instructions, states that he will take recourse to appropriate rem