IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

229 CWP-17693-2021(O&M)

Date of Decision: August 26, 2025 Gurnam Singh .....Petitioner VERSUS Punjab State Civil Supplies Corporation (PUNSUP) and another .....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARPREET SINGH BRAR Present : Mr. Vipin Mahajan, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Abilaksh Gaind, Advocate for the respondents (through V.C).

****

HARPREET SINGH BRAR, J. (Oral)

1. The present writ petition has been filed under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India with a prayer for issuance of an appropriate writ, order or directions especially in the nature of certiorari for quashing the communication dated 24.12.2018(P-13) issued by respondent-Corporation vide which the legal notice served by petitioner has been decided in terms of order passed in CWP-26539-2018 for release of retiral benefits and for quashing the order dated 13.12.2018 (P-10) vide which petitioner has been denied benefit of salary during his suspension period and further for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to pay interest @ 9% per annum on delayed payment of gratuity and leave encashment along with consequential benefits .

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner inter alia contends that the petitioner retired from the services of respondent-Corporation on 31.10.2008 and at the time of retirement of the petitioner FIR No.15 dated 01.03.2003 under Sections 420, 406, 120-B IPC and Section 7 of Essential Commodities Act, P.S. Ghuman, district Gurdarpur was pending against him. However, he stands acquitted of the charges vide judgment dated 16.1.2015. Thereafter, petitioner requested respondent-Corporation for release his retiral dues, however, his claim was kept pending. Feeling dissatisfied, the petitioner filed CWP-26539-2018 before this Court, which stands disposed of on 15.10.2018. Thereafter, the retiral dues of the petitioner were paid on

13.03.2019 (Annexure P-12).

3. Learned counsel for petitioner further submits that upon his acquittal, he is entitled to the interest on the delayed amount towards retiral dues in terms of the judgment rendered by a Full Bench of this Court in A.S. Randhawa Supg. Engineer (Retd.) vs. State of Punjab 1998 (1) SCT 343 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. Speaking through Justice N.K. Sodhi, the following was held:

“9. Since a Government employee on his retirement becomes immediately entitled to pension and other benefits in terms of the Pension Rules, a duty is simultaneously cast on the State to ensure the disbursement of pension and other benefits to the retirer in proper time. As to what is proper time will depend on the facts and circumstances of each case but normally it would not exceed two months from the date of retirement which time limit has been laid down by the Apex Court in M. Padmanabhan Nair's case (supra). If the State commits any default in the performance of its duty thereby denying to the retiree the benefit of the immediate use of his money, there is no gainsaying the fact that he gets a right to be compensated and, in our opinion, the only way to compensate him is to pay him interest for the period of delay on the amount as was due to him on the date of his retirement. Again, as to what should be the rate of interest, it should, in our view, be generally 12% unless the circumstances of a particular case warrant the payment of a higher rate which may extend to even 18%.”(emphasis added)

Reliance in this regard may also be placed on the judgments rendered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in S.K. Dua vs. State of Haryana (2008) 3 SCC 44 and State of Kerala vs. M. Padmanabhan Nair (1985) 1 SCC 429.

4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent submits that the retiral dues have already been paid