IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-23937-2025 (O&M)

Date of decision: 22.09.2025 Sadhu Singh Gill and another ....Petitioners Versus State of Punjab and others ....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARPREET SINGH BRAR Present: Mr. Birinder Pal, Advocate for the petitioners.

Ms. Niharika Sharma, AAG, Punjab.

HARPREET SINGH BRAR J. (Oral)

1. Prayer in this writ petition filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, is for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari, for quashing the order dated 24.07.2025 (Annexure P-10) passed by respondent No.2 whereby in complete disregard of the settled law and by wrongly invoking the principle of ‘No Work No Pay’, the arrears of salaries as admissible to petitioners have been denied. Further a writ of mandamus has been sought, directing the respondents to refund the salaries illegally recovered from the petitioners amounting to Rs.3,00,508/- and Rs.99,948/-, respectively along with interest and to pay the due salaries to the petitioners for the remaining period of their service tenure i.e. till 31.03.2021 in case of petitioner No.1 and

21.04.2022 in case of petitioner No.2.

2. The brief facts of the case are that petitioner No.1 – Sadhu Singh Gill was working as Manager and petitioner No.2 – Ram Krishan was working as Salesman with respondent No.3/Society and as per old Rules i.e. Punjab State Cooperative Agricultural Services Societies Rules, 1997 (in short ‘the Rules of 1997’), the retirement age of the petitioners was 60 years. Respondent No.2 by invoking the power under Rule 28 of the Punjab Cooperative Societies Rules, 1963 (hereinafter to be referred as ‘the Rules of 1963’), carried out amendment in Rule 19(A) of the Rules of 1997 by reducing the age of superannuation from 60 years to 58 years except for the Peon-cum-Chowkidar, who shall retire on attaining the age of superannuation of 60 years. Although both the petitioners were over 58 years old when the amendment was made, their services were retrospectively terminated w.e.f. 30.09.2020 by respondent No.3 through a proceeding dated 21.02.2021 (Annexure P- 3). Subsequently, the petitioners also refunded four months’ salary (01.10.2020 to 31.01.2021) as petitioner No.1 transferred Rs.3,00,508/- on 19.02.2021, and petitioner No.2 transferred Rs.99,948/- on 20.02.2021 (Annexures P-4 and P-5, respectively). Aggrieved by the amendment made by respondent No.2, a bunch of petitions were filed before the Division Bench of this Court and vide judgment dated 09.08.2024 passed in CWP No.16052 of 2020 and other connected cases (titled as The Punjab State Agricultural Cooperative Societies Employees Union Punjab vs State of Punjab and another), and the Division Bench of this Court has set-aside the amendment dated 24.09.2020 vide which the date of retirement of employees of the Cooperative Societies was reduced from 60 years to 58 years. Further the amendment was carried out without obtaining the legislative mandate in terms of Section 85(3) of the Punjab State Cooperative Societies Act, 1961. Thereafter, in compliance of the direction passed by the Division Bench of this Court, the impugned order dated 24.07.2025 (Annexure P-10) was passed by respondent No.2 by invoking the principle of "No Work No Pay", by denying the benefits of the period, when the petitioners were terminated after the age of 58 years.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the principle of "No Work No Pay", is misapplied. Both the petitioners were ready and willing to work but they were prevented from doing so due to illegal and ultra-vires amendment. As such, the petitioners cannot be penalized for the forced unemployment. Learned counsel for the petitioners has further highlighted that the benefit of notional continuation of service has been granted for other retiral benefits regarding enhanced gratuity and the dispute in the present petition is confined only to the extent of arrears of salary for the period when the pet