IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH State of Haryana & ors. ......Appellants vs.

Ran Singh …..Respondent Date of Reserve: 20.01.2026 Date of Pronouncement:26.02.2026 Uploaded on:- 27.02.2026 Whether only the operative part of the judgment is pronounced? No Whether full judgment is pronounced? Yes CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUDEEPTI SHARMA Present: Mr. Harish Nain, AAG, Haryana Mr. V.P. Sangwan, Advocate for the respondent.

****

SUDEEPTI SHARMA J.

1. The present regular second appeal is preferred against judgment and decree dated 08.05.2023 passed by learned Addl. District Judge, Bhiwani whereby the appeal filed by respondent/plaintiff against the judgment and decree dated 26.09.2019 passed by learned Addl. Civil Judge (Sr. Divn) Bhiwani, was decreed in his favour to the effect that he would be entitled interest @ 9% per annum from the date the amount is due till its realization.

BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE

2. Brief facts of the case as per civil suit are that respondent /plaintiff retired as Sub Inspector on 31.01.2015. All the retiral payments were to be paid to the respondent/plaintiff for his retirement which were not paid in time. Hence, he filed civil suit for payment of retiral benefits and for interest @ 18% per annum for delayed Provident Fund from 01.02.2015 to 30.03.2015 and further on the delayed payment of leave encashment for the period from 01.02.2015 to 09.09.2016. The civil suit filed by him was dismissed, vide judgment and decree dated 26.09.2019 passed by learned Addl. Civil Judge (Sr. Divn) Bhiwani whereas the appeal filed by him against the same was allowed by learned Addl. District Judge, Bhiwani, vide judgment and decree dated 08.05.2023. Hence, the present appeal.

SUBMISSIONS OF LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE PARTIES

3. Learned counsel for the appellants contends that the learned Addl. District Judge, Bhiwani has wrongly allowed the appeal filed by the respondent, vide its judgment and decree dated 08.05.2023, as the respondent was facing criminal trial in FIR No. 7 dated 16.01.2015 under Sections 7/13 of the Prevention of Corruption Act at P.S. SVB, Hissar. Therefore, certain amount of the respondent was withheld. He further contends that the learned Addl. District Judge, Bhiwani did not appreciate the facts and evidence on record and wrongly allowed the appeal of the respondent. He, therefore, prays that the present Regular second appeal be allowed.

4. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent contends that learned Addl. District Judge, Bhiwani has rightly allowed the appeal filed by the respondent. He, therefore, prays that the present Regular second appeal be dismissed.

5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the whole record of this case with their able assistance.

6. A perusal of the record shows that admittedly the respondent retired on 31.01.2015. FIR No. 7 dated 16.01.2015 was registered against him under Sections 7/13 of the Prevention of Corruption Act at P.S. SVB, Hissar. Since FIR was registered against him, he retired under suspension on 31.01.2015. The regular departmental enquiry was also ordered vide letter dated 20.01.2015. In the regular departmental enquiry, he was awarded a punishment of 2% cut in pension, vide office order dated 02.01.2017. His appeal against the same was pending at the time of filing of civil suit. His case for pension was sent to the Accountant General (A&E) Haryana, Chandigarh, vide memo No.15728 dated 20.03.2015 for granting provisional pension, since criminal case and departmental proceeding were pending against him. As per provision contained in Rule 9.15 (1) (c) of Punjab CSR Vol.II, Death-cum-Retirement Gratuity and Commutation of pension were not considered, therefore, his application form for grant of commutation of pension was kept pending in the office awaiting the final decision in the criminal case and departmental enquiry. The respondent/plaintiff was acquitted in criminal case, vide judgment dated 08.02.2018. Thereafter, his cas