Punjab-Haryana High Court
State Of Punjab Etc vs Sansar Singh on 30 January, 2024
Author: Suvir Sehgal
Bench: Suvir Sehgal
Sheetal
2024.02.14 00:20
I attest to the accuracy
2024:PHHC:012397
RSA-1502-1995 -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
206 RSA-1502-1995
Date of decision:30.01.2024
THE STATE OF PUNJAB & ANR. .. APPELLANTS
VS.
SANSAR SINGH ... RESPONDENT
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUVIR SEHGAL
Present: Mr. Athar Ahmed, DAG, Punjab.
None for the respondent.
2k
SUVIR SEHGAL J. (ORAL)
1. State-defendant is in second appeal before this Court
challenging the judgment and decree dated 13.12.1994 passed by the
First Appellate Court.
2. Sansar Singh, plaintiff-respondent, who retired from the post
of Inspector on 31.12.1981 pleaded that he has not been paid revised
pension, DCRG, preparatory leave, subsistence allowance and arrears of
salary. He filed a suit for declaration claiming the retiral dues alongwith
interest on the delayed payment.
3. Upon notice, suit was contested by the defendants-appellants
by taking preliminary objections. On merits, it was submitted that the
plaintiff-respondent remain suspended from 12.10.1976 to 15.04.1979
and
integrity of this document
High Court, Chandigarh
2024:PHHC:012397
RSA-1502-1995 -2-
during the pendency of an enquiry and he was ordered to re-join from
16.04.1979. A charge-sheet was served upon him and after conducting
an enquiry, he was found guilty of the charges and was reverted to the
post of Sub-Inspector with effect from 12.08.1981. It has been submitted
that his pay has been fixed and the arrears are being processed for
payment. Plaintiff controverted the stand taken by the defendant-
appellant by filing a replication. After the issues were framed and parties
led evidence, Trial Court by judgment and decree dated 23.04.1992,
dismissed the suit. First Appellate Court by decision dated 13.12.1994,
set aside the judgment and decree of the Trial Court and held that the
plaintiff-respondent is entitled to interest @ 12% with effect from
01.02.1982 upto the date of payment of retiral benefits.
4. State has preferred this appeal assailing the finding recorded
by the First Appellate Court.
5. I have heard the State counsel and examined the record with
his able assistance.
6. Perusal of the record shows that there was a delay in the
payment of various dues to the plaintiff-respondent. The dates on which
amount was disbursed are as under:-
Nature of the claim Amount Date of payment
1. Leave preparatory to|Rs.4956-00 29-3-1988
retirement.
2. Revised gratuity Rs.3543-75 30-1-1990
3. Arrears of pay etc. Rs.22366-90 = 2'7-2-1988
4. Revised pension Rs.9088-00 16-6-1989
2024:PHHC:012397
RSA-1502-1995 -3-
7. State counsel is not in a position to dispute the delayed
payment. It is a settled position that retiral dues are not to be treated as a
bounty, but are a valuable right of a government servant and any delay in
their disbursement is bound to attract penalty. As the plaintiff-respondent
has been deprived of the benefits of decades of service, when they fell
due, he is entitled to grant of interest.
8. For the afore-going reasons, this Court is of the view that there
is no illegality or perversity in the judgment of the First Appellate Court.
9. Appeal sans merit and it is hereby dismissed.
10. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.
30.01.2024 (SUVIR SEHGAL)
sheetal JUDGE
Whether Speaking/Reasoned Yes/No
Whether Reportable Yes/No
