CWP-4979- IN TH 207 Surinder Nath State of Punja CORAM: Present : HARPREET 1. Constitution mandamus Gratuity, leav from the date 2. only survivin delayed paym benefits. Lea 1 -2017 N THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJA AT CHANDIGA CWP Date er Nath VERSUS f Punjab and others HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HA Mr. Gaurav Datta and Ms. Sris petitioner. Mr. T.S. Sidhu, Advocate for the REET SINGH BRAR, J. (Oral) The present petition has been fil tution of India praying for issuance us directing the respondents to re y, leave encashment to the petitioner e date same fell due till date of actual Learned counsel for the petition urviving dispute pertains to the paym d payment of gratuity and leave encash s. Learned counsel further submits th NJAB AND HARYANA DIGARH CWP-4979-2017 Date of Decision: January 16, 2026 ....Petitioner SUS ...Responden HARPREET SINGH BRAR s. Srishti Sharma, Advocates for the for the respondents. een filed under Article 226/227 of the suance of a writ in the nature of to release the retiral benefits viz. tioner along with interest @18% p.a. actual realization. etitioner, inter alia, contends that the e payment of interest on account of encashment while releasing the retiral its that, admittedly, the gratuity was 2026 itioner ondents or the of the re of s viz. p.a. at the unt of retiral y was PUNEET CHAWLA 2026.01.16 15:01 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-4979- paid after a d delay of elev Inspector Gra upon his retir within two m pensionary b delay. As su petitioner for rendered by a (Retd.) vs. S petitioner fur disciplinary o charge-sheet retirement of took place in Learned cou 23151-2025, 11.08.2025 3. retiral dues h dispute that t dues and tha judgment pa 2 -2017 ter a delay of seven and a half years a f eleven years. The petitioner retired tor Grade-II, however, his retiral dues is retirement. The respondents were two months from the date of retirem nary benefits were released only afte As such, the delay in releasing al er for grant of interest on delayed pay ed by a Full Bench of this Court in A.S vs. State of Punjab 1998 (1) SCT er further submits that, at the time of inary or judicial proceedings were pen sheet been issued. In fact the charge ent of petitioner i.e. on 28.12.2017 lace in the year 2009 and 2012-201 d counsel relied on the judgment p 025, Vasdev Singh Versus State of to support his case. Per contra, learned counsel for dues have already been paid to the peti that there has been an inordinate de nd that the case of the petitioner st passed in A.S. Randhawa (supra ears and the leave encashment after a retired from service on 31.12.2014 as l dues were not released immediately duty-bound to disburse the same retirement; however, the petitioner’s ly after an inordinate and unjustified ing all his retiral dues entitles the d payment in terms of the judgment A.S. Randhawa Supdg. Engineer SCT 343. Learned counsel for the time of the petitioner’s retirement, no ere pending against him, nor had any harge sheet has been issued after the .2017 with regard to the misconduct 2013, which is forbidden in law ent passed by this Court in CWP e of Punjab and others, decided on el for the respondents submit that the he petitioner. However he is unable to ate delay in the release of the retiral ner stands squarely covered by the supra) and Vasdev Singh (supra) after a 14 as iately same oner’s stified s the gment neer or the nt, no d any er the nduct law. WP- ed on at the ble to retiral y the ra). PUNEET CHAWLA 2026.01.16 15:01 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-4979- Learned coun that the petit issued on 28. 4. parties and a that the petiti have been p obligated to r As such, his Bench of this disbursement done in a tim said disburse amount due. 5. direction to delayed paym the rate of 6% of two mont needful be do certified copy 3 -2017 d counsel for the respondents is also e petitioner stands retired on 31.12.2 on 28.12.2017 i.e. after retirement of t Having heard the submission m and after perusing the record with th e petitioner retired from the service on een paid after an inordinately long ed to release his all retiral dues within h, his case is squarely covered by th his Court in A.S. Randhawa (sup ement of pension and other benefits n a timely manner. Any delay over a sbursement would entitle the retired em t due. In view of the above, the prese to the respondent/competent autho d payment of the admissible retiral du e of 6% per annum. Such interest shal months after his retirement until th l be done within a period of three mon d copy of this order. is also not able to controvert the fact 1.12.2014 and the charge-sheet was nt of the petitioner. sion made by learned counsel for the ith their able assistance, it transpires ice on 31.12.2014 and his retiral dues y long delay. The respondent was within two months of his retirement. by the judgment rendered by a Full (supra) wherein it was opined that nefits payable at retirement must be over a period of two months qua the ired employee to claim interest on the present petition is disposed of with t authority to release interest on the tiral dues accrued to the petitioner at st shall be calculated from the expiry il the date of actual payment. The e months from the date of receipt of a e fact t was or the spires l dues was ment. a Full d that ust be ua the on the f with n the ner at expiry The pt of a PUNEET CHAWLA 2026.01.16 15:01 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-4979- 6. disposed of. January 16 P.C 4 -2017 Pending miscellaneous ap ed of. 16, 2026 Whether speaking/reasone Whether Reportable. : ous application(s), if any, also stands (HARPREET SINGH BRAR) JUDGE easoned. : Yes/No Yes/No stands RAR) PUNEET CHAWLA 2026.01.16 15:01 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document