IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: 11.09.2025 Dr. Nilam .... Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and others ... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA Present: Mr. Dinesh Arora, Advocate, Mr. Jatin Sehra, Advocate, and Mr. Ashish Khatkar, Advocate, for the petitioner.

Mr. Parveen Mehta, Additional Advocate General, Haryana.

Mr. Manjeet Singh, Advocate, for respondents no.4 and 5.

Mr. Ravindra Singh, Advocate, for Mr. Puneet Gupta, Advocate, for respondent no.6.

TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA, J. (ORAL)

The petition has been filed seeking a writ of mandamus directing the second and the third respondents to take stringent action against the fourth respondent/College for withholding the petitioner’s pensionary benefits, who retired on attaining the age of superannuation on 31.10.2024, and release the same with interest at the rate of eighteen per cent per annum from the date of retirement till its realisation.

2. As per undisputed facts on record, the petitioner joined as Lecturer in Hindi in 1992 in the College, which is a government aided institution run by the fifth respondent/Jat Education Society (hereinafter

2025.09.24 09:11 referred to as ‘the Society’). On account of unblemished service record, she got promoted as Associate Professor. Also, before superannuating from service on 31.10.2024, she officiated as Principal of the College for about three years. Her pension and gratuity papers were duly submitted before retirement. Pursuant thereto, the third respondent/Director General, Higher Education, exercising powers under the Haryana Affiliated Colleges (Pension and Contributory Fund) Rules, 1999, issued Pension Payment Order (PPO), dated 03.12.2024, Annexure P-3. In terms therewith, payment of pension was to commence with effect from 01.11.2024, and she was to be paid gratuity of ₹20 lakh as well. However, neither the pension, nor any other retiral benefit was released. The matter was brought to the notice of the third respondent who, vide memo dated 20.01.2025, Annexure P-14, requested the President of the Society to inform why had the benefits not been released to the petitioner, and under which rule had the same been withheld. No response was received, and another memo dated 30.01.2025, Annexure P-15, was issued requesting the President to personally look into the matter and inform the reasons for withholding due benefits. Still, things remained as they were, and the instant petition seeking release of the benefits had to be filed.

2.1. During pendency of the petition, the retiral benefits were released to the petitioner on different dates; gratuity on 30.06.2025, arrears of pension on 02.07.2025, provident fund on 22.07.2025, first monthly pension on 02.08.2025, and finally the leave encashment on 25.08.2025.

3. In this background, learned counsel contended that the only remaining claim of the petitioner was regarding payment of interest on the delayed release of due retiral benefits, which had been withheld without any justifiable reason. This has caused undue harassment, humiliation, stress and

2025.09.24 09:11 the resultant mental agony to her which makes the fourth and the fifth respondents liable to pay penal interest for the delay.

4. Learned counsel for the fourth and the fifth respondents, however, submitted that the College was not liable to pay interest as there were proceedings pending against the petitioner, and she had been accused of insubordination and opposing the authority of the Management/Society to question her conduct. In this regard, he has referred to a complaint dated 14.08.2024, Annexure R-5/1, received from Dr. Suresh Kumar, Associate Professor, Department of Zoology in the College, alleging that the petitioner, while she was acting Principal, did not send his promotion case to the University for further action due to mala fide intention. When a complaint was made against the petitioner in this regard, she levelled false allegations against the complainant and warn