115 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision: 17.09.2025 Hakam Singh ....Petitioner Versus The Punjab State Cooperative Supply and Marketing Federation Ltd ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARPREET SINGH BRAR Present: Mr. Shiv Kumar, Advocate and Mr. Lovedev Singh, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Vikas Arora, DAG, Punjab.

HARPREET SINGH BRAR, J. (ORAL)

1. The present civil writ petition has been filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent to release interest @ 18% per annum on the delayed payment of leave encashment.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner inter alia contends that the petitioner retired as a Field Officer on 30.04.2011 (Annexure P-2) after serving the respondent-Federation. His gratuity was withheld due to pending departmental proceedings which was eventually released on 15.09.2017 (Annexure P-3) along with interest @ 9% per annum. However, other retiral benefits including leave encashment and security were not released even though all departmental proceedings against the petitioner have culminated in the year 2008 and no punishment and recovery was imposed. The petitioner made several representations and even served a legal notice on 30.03.2024 (Annexure P-4) which remained unheeded. The petitioner approached this Court by way of filing CWP No.95 of 2025 which was disposed of vide order daetd 01.09.2025 (Annexure P-5) directing the respondent-Federation to consider the legal notice of the petitioner and pass a speaking order within a period of two months. In compliance thereof, the respondent-Federation passed the order on 11.07.2025 and released the leave encashment and other dues on 14.08.2025. However, the respondent-Federation has not paid any interest on account of delay of over 14 years in releasing these dues, as such, the case of the petitioner is squarely covered by 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

3. Mr. Vikas Arora, DAG, Punjab puts in appearance on behalf of respondent No.1 and is not in a position to controvert the fact that the petitioner retired on 30.04.2011 and the fact that in terms of order dated 11.07.2025 (Annexure P-6), the leave encashment etc. was only released on 14.08.2025 but without interest. Further, he admitted the fact that the case of the petitioner is covered by the ratio of law laid down by a Full Bench of this Court in A.S.

Randhawa Supg. Engineer (Retd.) (supra).

4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of the records, it transpires that the disciplinary proceedings were concluded on 20.08.2008 and the petitioner retired on 30.04.2011 and leave encashment and security was released to the petitioner only on 14.08.2025. As such, in terms of the ratio of law laid down by a Full Bench of this Court in A.S. Randhawa Supg. Engineer (Retd.) (supra), the petitioner is entitled to the interest on delay of over 14 years from the due date (two months after the retirement) till the date of actual payment.

5. In view of the controversy involved in the present case, the present writ petition is disposed of and the respondent is directed to pay interest @ 6% per annum on account of delay of over 14 years in releasing the retiral dues in view of the judgment rendered by a Full Bench of this Court in A.S. Randhawa Supg. Engineer (Retd.) (supra) from the date it became due (two months after the retirement), within a period of three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.

(HARPREET SINGH BRAR)

JUDGE

17.09.2025

Neha