IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-33484-2025 (O&M)

Date of decision: 12.11.2025 Om Prakash Grover ....Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and another ....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARPREET SINGH BRAR Present: Ms. Anmol Thakur, Advocate for Mr. Deepak Arora, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Vikas Arora, DAG, Punjab for respondent No.1.

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 mandamus, directing the respondent/department to pay interest @ 18% to the petitioner on his retiral benefits of Rs.66,76,569/-, which were illegally withheld.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner, inter alia, contends that the petitioner was superannuated on 30.11.2017 and despite being entitled to receive all post-retirement benefits immediately, the respondent/department unlawfully withheld his retiral dues and released them after a huge delay. The respondent failed to provide any justification for this inordinate delay and has not paid any interest despite the petitioner's representations and a legal notice dated

01.10.2025. The details of the delayed retirement dues given to the petitioner are as follows:-

3. Notice of motion.

4. Mr. Vikas Arora, DAG, Punjab who is present in the Court accepts notice on behalf of respondent No.1 – State and could not controvert the fact that the delay has occurred in releasing the retiral dues of the petitioner.

5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record with their able assistance.

6. A gainful reference can be made to 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)

7. 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

8. In view of the above discussions, the present writ petition is allowed. The respondents are directed to release interest @ 6% per annum on the delayed payment of retiral benefits to the petitioner, to be calculated after the expiry of two months from the date of his retirement till the date of actual payment. The said amount shall be released to the petitioner within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.

(HARPREET SINGH BRAR)

JUDGE

12.11.2025 yakub Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether reportable: Yes/No