Punjab-Haryana High Court
Amrik Singh vs Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd ... on 24 April, 2024
Author: Jasgurpreet Singh Puri
Bench: Jasgurpreet Singh Puri
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:058451
CWP-4105-2020 -1-
2024:PHHC:058451
230
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CWP-4105-2020
Date of decision: 24.04.2024
AMRIK SINGH
...Petitioner
VERSUS
UTTAR HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM LTD PANCHKULA AND
OTHERS
...Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASGURPREET SINGH PURI
Present:- Mr. Mohnish Sharma, Advocate
for the petitioner.
Mr. Anil Sharma, Advocate
for the respondents.
****
JASGURPREET SINGH PURI, J. (Oral)
1. The present writ petition has been filed under Articles 226/227 of
the Constitution of India seeking issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari
for setting aside the impugned office memo dated 01.08.2018 (Annexure P-3) to
the extent, whereby withheld amount (recovery) of Rs.1,34,816/- was deducted
from the DCGR/Gratuity of the petitioner after his retirement on account of half
margin payments without any show cause notice or enquiry and to refund the
amount along with interest @ 18% per annum and further to issue a writ in the
nature of mandamus directing the respondents to grant 3rd ACP w.e.f.
01.01.2016 to the petitioner along with consequential service benefits and also
to grant 18% interest on the delayed payments of arrear of pension, arrear of
pay scale and payment of commutation and gratuity.
1 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:058451
2024:PHHC:058451
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is
restricting his claim only to the extent of grant of interest on the delayed
payment of Rs.1,34,816/-, which was deducted from his gratuity and has been
paid to him during the pendency of the present writ petition on 17.08.2021 and
also interest on the delayed payment of Rs.21,175/- on account of leave
encashment, which was paid to him on 25.07.2023. He referred to a Full Bench
judgment of this Court in A. S. Randhawa versus State of Punjab and others,
1997 (3) SCT 468 in this regard.
3. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents submitted
that so far as the interest on the delayed payment of Rs.1,34,816/- is concerned,
there is no justification with regard to the delay at all but so far as the interest
on the delayed payment of Rs.21,175/- is concerned, the petitioner has
submitted the performa of leave encashment in the year 2023 itself and
therefore, he is not entitled for getting interest on the same.
4. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, this Court is of the
view that the mere fact that the petitioner had submitted the performa of leave
encashment in the year 2023 i.e. after his retirement cannot become a ground
for denial of interest. Whenever an employee retires, it is a duty of the employer
to get all the information and documents from the employee and it cannot
become a ground for denial of interest.
5. In view of the above, the present writ petition is partly allowed.
The respondents are directed to pay interest @ 6% per annum to the petitioner
on the aforesaid two heads i.e. Rs.1,34,816/- and Rs.21,175/- after two months
from the date of his retirement till the date of its disbursement. The aforesaid
interest shall be paid by the respondents to the petitioner within a period of
2 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:058451
2024:PHHC:058451
three months from today after calculating the same. In case the aforesaid
amount is not paid to the petitioner within a period of aforesaid three months,
then the petitioner shall be entitled for future rate of interest @ 9% per annum
(simple). However, there shall be no order as to costs.
(JASGURPREET SINGH PURI)
24.04.2024 JUDGE
Chetan Thakur
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No
Whether reportable : Yes/No
3 of 3
