Punjab-Haryana High Court
Sarbjit Singh Kandhari vs State Of Punjab And Others on 11 December, 2023
Author: Ritu Bahri
Bench: Ritu Bahri
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:158156-DB
LPA No. 278 of 2023 1 2023:PHHC:158156-DB
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
Letters Patent Appeal No.278 of 2023 (O&M)
Date of Decision: 11.12.2023
Sarbjit Singh Kandhari .....Appellant
versus
State of Punjab and others .....Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MS.JUSTICE RITU BAHRI, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMAN CHAUDHARY, JUDGE
Present :
Mr. Saurabh Arora, Advocate, for the appellant.
Ms. Lavanya Paul, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab.
****
RITU BAHRI, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE (oral)
The reply dated 22.11.2023 filed by the respondent-State of
Punjab is taken on record.
2. The appellant has filed this appeal against the judgment
dated 24.01.2023 passed by the learned Single Judge whereby the
petition filed by the appellant was dismissed.
3. The stand taken by the respondents in the reply dated
22.11.2023 is that due to pendency of investigation in FIR No. 124 dated
22.07.2016 registered under Section 13(2) of the Prevention of
Corruption Act, 1988 and under Section 384 of the Indian Penal Code,
1860, the retiral benefits i.e. gratuity and leave encashment have not been
released to the appellant till date. A perusal of the reply further shows
that the investigation in the present FIR has already been completed and
the challan is in the process of being presented in the competent Court.
4. The FIR in the present case was registered 22.07 2016 and
till today i.e. 11.12.2023 no challan has been presented in the competent
Court and the investigation in the FIR is pending for almost six years and
during this period the appellant has retired from service on 31.12.2019.
5. Learned counsel for the appellant has made a reference to
the judgment rendered by the Supreme Court in Union of India vs.
K.V.Jankiraman 1991(3) SCT 317 where in paras-16 and 17 of the
judgment it has been observed that it is only when a charge-memo in a
1 of 2
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:158156-DB
LPA No. 278 of 2023 2 2023:PHHC:158156-DB
disciplinary proceedings or a charge-sheet in a criminal prosecution is
issued to the employee, that it can be said that the departmental
proceedings/criminal prosecution is initiated against the employee. In the
present case till date no challan in the FIR in question has been presented
in the competent Court as per the reply filed by the respondents dated
23.11.2023 and non presentation of challan would amount to say that no
proceedings are pending in any Court and injustice would be caused to an
employee if retiral benefits are not released to him on account of
pendency of any proceedings in the competent Court.
6. Learned State counsel appearing on behalf of the
respondent-State of Punjab submits that no departmental proceedings or
any proceedings before the competent Court are pending against the
appellant. She further submits that no departmental proceedings were
initiated against the appellant keeping in view the instructions dated
30.05.2014.
7. In view of the above facts and circumstances and the
observations made by the Supreme Court in the judgment UOI vs.
K.V.Jankiraman (supra), the present appeal is allowed and a direction is
being issued to the respondents to release the retiral benefits i.e. leave
encashment and gratuity to the appellant with interest at the rate of 9%
from the date of filing of the petition till its realization.
Since main appeal itself has been decided, no orders are
required to be passed in CM No. 804 of 2023.
(RITU BAHRI)
ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE
(AMAN CHAUDHARY)
JUDGE
11.12.2023
ravinder Whether speaking/reasoned √Yes/No
Whetherreportable Yes/No√
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:158156-DB
2 of 2
