Punjab-Haryana High Court
Raghbir Singh vs State Of Haryana And Others on 1 May, 2024
Author: Harsimran Singh Sethi
Bench: Harsimran Singh Sethi
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:060051
Neutral Citation No.2024:PHHC:060051
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
264
CWP-8827-2021 (O&M)
Decided on : 01.05.2024
RAGHBIR SINGH . . .Petitioner
Versus
STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS . . . Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI
PRESENT: Mr. Sachin Gupta Ladwa, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Tapan Kumar Yadav, DAG, Haryana.
Mr. A. P. S. Sekhon, Advocate for respondent No. 4.
****
HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI , J. (Oral)
1. In the present petition, the grievance of the petitioner is that
when the petitioner retired from the post of Forest Guard on 31.05.2013, a
sum of Rs. 89,809/- was retained by the respondents on the ground that
there is an information of shortage of trees which needs to be enquired into.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that after the
retirement of the petitioner on 31.05.2013 an enquiry was conducted by the
department concerned wherein the allegations alleged upon him were not
proved which fact is clear from the reply of the respondents itself hence,
the amount of Rs. 89, 809/- which has been retained by the respondents for
more than 10 years be released to the petitioner alongwith the interest.
3. Learned counsel for the respondents on the other hand submits
that an enquiry proceedings was initiated by the respondents-department
against the petitioner after his retirement hence, the amount of Rs. 89,809/-
was rightly retained by the respondents though it is a conceded fact that the
allegations alleged against the petitioner in the departmental enquiry could
not be proved.
1 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:060051
CWP-8827-2021 (O&M) -2- 2024:PHHC:060051
4 I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone
through the record with their able assistance.
5. It is a conceded position that out of the total gratuity amount
admissible to the petitioner, a sum of Rs. 89,809/- was deducted on the
allegations alleged that the petitioner has caused loss which allegation was
enquired into after the retirement of the petitioner but the said allegation
could not be proved. Once, an allegations alleged against the petitioner could
not be proved, any amount deducted/retained on the basis of said allegations,
not only needs to be released but the petitioner needs to be compensated for
not being allowed to use the said amount for the period of 10 years.
6. As per the judgment of a Coordinate Bench of this Court in
J.S. Cheema Vs. State of Haryana, 2014(13) RCR (Civil) 355, wherein it
has been held that where an amount belonging to an employee, has been
retained and used by the respondents, upon the release of the said amount, on
a later date, the interest has to be given. The relevant paragraph of J.S.
Cheema's case (supra) is as under: -
"The jurisprudential basis for grant of interest is the fact
that one person's money has been used by somebody else.
It is in that sense rent for the usage of money. If the user
is compounded by any negligence on the part of the
person with whom the money is lying it may result in
higher rate because then it can also include the
component of damages (in the form of interest). In the
circumstances, even if there is no negligence on the part
of the State it cannot be denied that money which rightly
belonged to the petitioner was in the custody of the State
and was being used by it."
2 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:060051
CWP-8827-2021 (O&M) -3- 2024:PHHC:060051
7. In the present case, the amount of Rs. 89,809/- which has been
retained by the respondents for a period of 10 years has been used by the
department concerned, hence, keeping in view the facts and circumstances
recorded herein above, the petitioner is entitled for release of said amount of
Rs. 89,809/- alongwith interest @ 6% per annum from the date of accrual
of the said amount i.e. the date of retirement till the actual release of the said
amount.
8 Let the order be complied within a period of eight weeks from
the date of receipt of copy of this order.
9 The present petition is allowed in above terms.
10 Pending civil miscellaneous application, if any, shall also stand
disposed of.
(HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI)
JUDGE
01.05.2024
Riya
Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No
Whether Reportable: Yes/No
3 of 3
