High CourtsSingle Bench(2011) 03 P&H CK 0350

Om Prakash Singh vs Uttari Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam and Others

Punjab And Haryana At Chandigarh · Decided on 14 March 2011

HON’BLE JUDGES
Ranjit Singh, J
CASE NUMBER
Civil Writ Petition No. 2915 of 2010

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

3 paragraphs · 403 words

Ranjit Singh, J.—On 25.2.2011, the respondents were required to file an affidavit to disclose the reasons as to why the amount of pensionary benefits due to the petitioner had been withheld for inordinately long period of eight years. The respondents have now filed an affidavit, which is taken on record. It is stated that on the retirement of the petitioner on 30.6.2003, full provisional pension as well as leave encashment was released to him. The reason for withholding the gratuity and other pensionary benefits was on account of pendency of a criminal case against the petitioner. This case was u/s 304-A of Indian Penal Code and had no connection with the service of the petitioner. The petitioner has been acquitted of this charge on 2.9.2008. The case of damages, if any, has also been closed.

2.

I do not see any justification on the part of the respondents to withhold the retiral benefits of the petitioner on the ground that he was facing the criminal charge due to an accident, which had no connection with the service of the petitioner. When asked to justify this action, the counsel for the respondents could not show any provision which would authorize withholding of pensionary benefits under these circumstances. Now there is no reason to withhold the benefits, but still the remaining pensionary benefits have not been released so far. Counsel for the respondents undertakes to release such benefits within one month.

3.

I am of the view that the pensionary benefits of the petitioner have been withheld without any justification and that too for a long period of time. If the respondents had been considerate, they could have released the pensionary benefits in the year 2008, when the petitioner was acquitted of the criminal charge. No justification, thus, is available to withhold the pensionary benefits of the petitioner. Accordingly, the amount of the pensionary benefits of the petitioner withheld, be paid within one month from today and it shall cover interest @ 9% per annum from the date it is due to the date of payment. If the benefits are not released within a period of one month, the rate of interest payable shall be @ 12% per annum from the date it is due to the date of payment. The petitioner shall also be at liberty to again approach any appropriate forum in case the pensionary benefits still are not released within one month.