Darshan Singh vs State Of Punjab And Anr
2022 Latest Caselaw 1963 P&H

CWP No.10104 of 2018                                                 -1-

        IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                     AT CHANDIGARH

                          CWP No.10104 of 2018
                          Date of Decision:-23.03.2022

Darshan Singh
                                                     ...Petitioner

                          Versus

State of Punjab and another
                                                     ...Respondents

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI

Present:- Mr. H.P.S. Ishar, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Kannan Malik, AAG, Punjab.

(Proceedings conducted through video conferencing)

HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI J.(Oral)

The present petition has been filed seeking grant of interest on

the delayed release in payment of pensionary benefits.

Learned counsel for the petitioner argues that though the

petitioner attained the age of superannuation on 31.10.2016 but the

pensionary benefits were released to him in the year 2017 only and that too

after certain deductions and as the pensionary benefits were released after a

delay of more than two months of retirement, the petitioner is entitled for

grant of interest keeping in view the judgment of Full Bench of this Court

in A.S. Randhawa Vs. State of Punjab and others, 1997(3) SCT 468.

After notice of motion, the respondents have filed the reply,

wherein they have defended the action saying that the delay in releasing of

pensionary benefits is attributable to the petitioner.

1 of 2

In the reply, it has been mentioned that rather than submitting

the pension papers six months prior to the date of retirement, the petitioner

only completed the pension papers on 21.9.2019, approximately one month

before the retirement and even the pension papers filled by the petitioner

were found to be incorrect as the pension papers were filled as per the

entries made in the service book, which entries in the service book were

found to be incorrect and those entries in the service book were carried out

by the petitioner himself, who was the dealing assistant at that time and

therefore, as there were incorrect entries in the service book, which were

made part of the pension papers, the Accountant General, Punjab had

returned the pension papers to be rectified, and after the pension papers

were rectified the petitioner was given the pensionary benefits and hence

the delay is attributable to the petitioner only and not the respondent-

Department.

There is no replication to the written statement filed on behalf

of respondents.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as the disputed

question of law has been raised to this petition, the petitioner be allowed to

withdraw this petition to raise a remedy before the Civil Court to claim

interest.

Ordered accordingly.

March 23, 2022                            ( HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI)
Vijay Asija                                       JUDGE


Whether speaking/reasoned                  Yes / No
Whether Reportable                         Yes / No




                                 2 of 2