Punjab-Haryana High Court
Kishan Lal Saini vs State Of Haryana on 1 April, 2024
Author: Harsimran Singh Sethi
Bench: Harsimran Singh Sethi
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:043662
CWP-7319-2017 (O&M) -1- 2024:PHHC:043662
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
218 CWP-7319-2017 (O&M)
Date of Decision :01.04.2024
Kishan Lal Saini ...Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana and others ....Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI
Present: Mr. Lajpat Sharma, Advocate for
Mr. Vivek Khatri, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Sandeep Singh Mann, Addl. A.G. Haryana.
***
Harsimran Singh Sethi, J. (Oral)
1. In the present petition, prayer of the petitioner is for quashing
of orders dated 23.01.2017 (Annexure P/4) as well as dated 27.01.2017
(Annexure P/5) by which, claim of the petitioner for the grant of benefit of
ACP has been rejected by the respondents.
2. At the outset, learned counsel for the respondents submits that
the present petition has been filed after a period of 11 years of the
retirement of the petitioner and that too with regard to the claim, which is
more than 25 years old. Learned counsel for the respondents further submits
that after 11 years of the retirement, no claim for the grant of service benefit
be allowed and the present writ petition is liable to be dismissed on the
ground of delay and latches.
3. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone
1 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:043662
CWP-7319-2017 (O&M) -2- 2024:PHHC:043662
through the record with their able assistance.
4 From the facts which have been mentioned in the present
petition, petitioner is claiming benefit of 1st and 2nd ACP. Benefit of 1st ACP
was made operational w.e.f. 01.01.1996 but the petitioner never raised any
grievance with regard to the grant of the said benefit while in service.
Petitioner retired from service in the year 2000 and after 11 years of his
retirement, he has filed a writ petition initially claiming the benefit of 2nd
ACP. Though, not raised in the petition but at the time of hearing another
argument has been raised that even benefit of 1st ACP for which, the
petitioner was entitled from 01.01.1996 was not granted to him.
5. The question which arises for determination before this Court is
that as to whether the service benefits can be claimed by filing a writ
petition after a period of 11 years of retirement or whether such claim can
be entertained by the Court or not.
6. The question of law on the said aspect has already been settled
by this Court in CWP-28508-2013 titled as Suraj mal vs. State of Haryana
and others decided on 29.09.2014, wherein, it has been held that no claim
for the grant of service benefit can be raised after the retirement. Nothing
has been explained as to why, from the year 1996 i.e. for a period of more
than 25 years the petitioner remained silent. In the absence of any claim
raised during the service career of the petitioner, present petition which has
been filed after 11 years of retirement of the petitioner cannot be entertained
on the ground of delay and latches.
7. The view being taken by this Court is supported by the
judgment in Suraj Mal (supra), according to which, no prayer for the grant
of service benefit can be entertained beyond the period of 03 years of
2 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:043662
CWP-7319-2017 (O&M) -3- 2024:PHHC:043662
retirement. Claim of the petitioner in the present petition has been raised
after 11 years of retirement and after a period of 25 years after the cause of
action arose hence, the same cannot be accepted.
8. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances recorded
hereinbefore, no ground for interference by this Court is made out and the
present petition is accordingly dismissed.
9. Civil miscellaneous application pending, if any is disposed of.
April 01, 2024 (HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI)
aarti JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No
Whether reportable : Yes/No
3 of 3
