IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

207 CWP-4979-2017 Date of Decision: January 16, 2026 Surinder Nath ....Petitioner VERSUS State of Punjab and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARPREET SINGH BRAR Present : Mr. Gaurav Datta and Ms. Srishti Sharma, Advocates for the petitioner.

Mr. T.S. Sidhu, Advocate for the respondents.

HARPREET SINGH BRAR, J. (Oral)

1. The present petition has been filed under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to release the retiral benefits viz. Gratuity, leave encashment to the petitioner along with interest @18% p.a.

from the date same fell due till date of actual realization.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner, inter alia, contends that the only surviving dispute pertains to the payment of interest on account of delayed payment of gratuity and leave encashment while releasing the retiral benefits. Learned counsel further submits that, admittedly, the gratuity was paid after a delay of seven and a half years and the leave encashment after a delay of eleven years. The petitioner retired from service on 31.12.2014 as Inspector Grade-II, however, his retiral dues were not released immediately upon his retirement. The respondents were duty-bound to disburse the same within two months from the date of retirement; however, the petitioner’s pensionary benefits were released only after an inordinate and unjustified delay. As such, the delay in releasing all his retiral dues entitles the petitioner for grant of interest on delayed payment in terms of the judgment rendered by a Full Bench of this Court in A.S. Randhawa Supdg. Engineer (Retd.) vs. State of Punjab 1998 (1) SCT 343. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that, at the time of the petitioner’s retirement, no disciplinary or judicial proceedings were pending against him, nor had any charge-sheet been issued. In fact the charge sheet has been issued after the retirement of petitioner i.e. on 28.12.2017 with regard to the misconduct took place in the year 2009 and 2012-2013, which is forbidden in law. Learned counsel relied on the judgment passed by this Court in CWP- 23151-2025, Vasdev Singh Versus State of Punjab and others, decided on

11.08.2025 to support his case.

3. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents submit that the retiral dues have already been paid to the petitioner. However he is unable to dispute that there has been an inordinate delay in the release of the retiral dues and that the case of the petitioner stands squarely covered by the judgment passed in A.S. Randhawa (supra) and Vasdev Singh (supra).

Learned counsel for the respondents is also not able to controvert the fact that the petitioner stands retired on 31.12.2014 and the charge-sheet was issued on 28.12.2017 i.e. after retirement of the petitioner.

4. Having heard the submission made by learned counsel for the parties and after perusing the record with their able assistance, it transpires that the petitioner retired from the service on 31.12.2014 and his retiral dues have been paid after an inordinately long delay. The respondent was obligated to release his all retiral dues within two months of his retirement. As such, his case is squarely covered by the judgment rendered by a Full Bench of this Court in A.S. Randhawa (supra) wherein it was opined that disbursement of pension and other benefits payable at retirement must be done in a timely manner. Any delay over a period of two months qua the said disbursement would entitle the retired employee to claim interest on the amount due.

5. In view of the above, the present petition is disposed of with direction to the respondent/competent authority to release interest on the delayed payment of the admissible retiral dues accrued to the petitioner at the rate of 6% per annum. Such interest shall be calculated from the expiry of two months after his retirement until the date of actual payment.