IN THE 223 Balkar Singh Punjab State Power Corporation Limited and others CORAM: Present : HARPREET SINGH BRAR 1. of the Constitution of India with a prayer for issuance of an appropriate writ, order or directions especially in the nature of certiorari for quashing the impugned order dated whereby the claim of the petitioner has been rejected and issuance of a direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to grant interest @ 18% on delayed payment of pension w.e.f. date of retirement i.e. 31.01.2011 till the release of pension i.e.26.07.2019. 2. petitioner is entitled to the interest Full Bench of this C of Punjab 1998 (1) SCT 343 pension and other benefits payable at retirement must be done in a timely manner. Any delay over a period of two months, qua the said disbursement 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP Date of Decision: Balkar Singh VERSUS Punjab State Power Corporation Limited and others HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARPREET SINGH BRAR Mr. Neeraj Khanna, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. Amrit Singh Kang, Advocate for respondents **** HARPREET SINGH BRAR, J. (Oral) The present writ petition has been filed under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India with a prayer for issuance of an appropriate writ, order or directions especially in the nature of certiorari for quashing the impugned order dated 04.02.2021(Annex whereby the claim of the petitioner has been rejected and issuance of a direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents grant interest @ 18% on delayed payment of pension w.e.f. date of i.e. 31.01.2011 till the release of pension i.e.26.07.2019. Learned counsel for the petitioner however, submits that petitioner is entitled to the interest in terms of the judgment Full Bench of this Court in A.J. Randhawa Supg. Engineer of Punjab 1998 (1) SCT 343 wherein it was opined that disbursement of pension and other benefits payable at retirement must be done in a timely manner. Any delay over a period of two months, qua the said disbursement HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-14398-2021 Date of Decision: August 13, 2025 .....Petitioner VERSUS Punjab State Power Corporation Limited and others .....Respondents HARPREET SINGH BRAR for the petitioner. Mr. Amrit Singh Kang, Advocate for respondents-Corporation. The present writ petition has been filed under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India with a prayer for issuance of an appropriate writ, order or directions especially in the nature of certiorari for quashing the (Annexure P-4) passed by respondent whereby the claim of the petitioner has been rejected and further for issuance of a direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents grant interest @ 18% on delayed payment of pension w.e.f. date of i.e. 31.01.2011 till the release of pension i.e.26.07.2019. Learned counsel for the petitioner however, submits that in terms of the judgment rendered by a A.J. Randhawa Supg. Engineer (Retd.) vs. State wherein it was opined that disbursement of pension and other benefits payable at retirement must be done in a timely manner. Any delay over a period of two months, qua the said disbursement , 2025 .....Petitioner .....Respondents Corporation. The present writ petition has been filed under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India with a prayer for issuance of an appropriate writ, order or directions especially in the nature of certiorari for quashing the 4) passed by respondent further for issuance of a direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents grant interest @ 18% on delayed payment of pension w.e.f. date of Learned counsel for the petitioner however, submits that rendered by a (Retd.) vs. State wherein it was opined that disbursement of pension and other benefits payable at retirement must be done in a timely manner. Any delay over a period of two months, qua the said disbursement PUNEET CHAWLA 2025.08.19 11:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document would entitle the re Speaking through “9. Since a Government employee on his retirement becomes immediately entitled to pension and other benefits in terms of the Pension Rules, a d disbursement of pension and other benefits to the retirer in proper time. circumstances of each case but normally it would not exceed two months fr down by the Apex the State commits any default in the performance of its duty thereby denying to the retiree the benefit of the immediate use of his mo there is no gainsaying the fact that he gets a right to be compensated and, in our opinion, the interest for the period of delay on the amount as was due to him on the date of his retirement. Again, as to what interest, it should, circumstances of a particular case warrant the payment of a higher rate which may extend to even 18%. rendered by the Hon (2008) 3 SCC 44 SCC 429. 3. the retiral dues have already been released to the petitioner after calculation on 04.09.2019. 4. withdraw the present petition with representation with regard to his claim for grant of interest on the delayed disbursement of his pension/retiral benefits from the date of his retirement i.e. w.e.f. 31.01.2011, till the date of release of his pension i.e. 5. that in case the petitioner moves a representation seeking payment of interest 2 would entitle the retired employee to claim interest on the amount due. through Justice N.K. Sodhi, the following was held: 9. Since a Government employee on his retirement becomes immediately entitled to pension and other benefits in terms of the Pension Rules, a duty is simultaneously cast on the State to ensure the disbursement of pension and other benefits to the retirer in proper time. As to what is proper time will depend on the facts and circumstances of each case but normally it would not exceed two months from the date of retirement down by the Apex Court in M. Padmanabhan Nair's case (supra). If the State commits any default in the performance of its duty thereby denying to the retiree the benefit of the immediate use of his mo there is no gainsaying the fact that he gets a right to be compensated in our opinion, the only way to compensate him is to pay him interest for the period of delay on the amount as was due to him on the date of his retirement. Again, as to what interest, it should, in our view, be circumstances of a particular case warrant the payment of a higher rate which may extend to even 18%.” Reliance in this regard may also be rendered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in (2008) 3 SCC 44 and State of Kerala vs. M. Padmanabhan Nair (1985) 1 Learned counsel for the respondents the retiral dues have already been released to the petitioner after calculation on 04.09.2019. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner wishes to withdraw the present petition with liberty to file a comprehensive representation with regard to his claim for grant of interest on the delayed disbursement of his pension/retiral benefits from the date of his retirement i.e. w.e.f. 31.01.2011, till the date of release of his pension i.e. Learned counsel representing the respondents assures the Court that in case the petitioner moves a representation seeking payment of interest tired employee to claim interest on the amount due. Justice N.K. Sodhi, the following was held: 9. Since a Government employee on his retirement becomes immediately entitled to pension and other benefits in terms of the uty is simultaneously cast on the State to ensure the disbursement of pension and other benefits to the retirer in proper As to what is proper time will depend on the facts and circumstances of each case but normally it would not exceed two om the date of retirement which time limit has been laid in M. Padmanabhan Nair's case (supra). If the State commits any default in the performance of its duty thereby denying to the retiree the benefit of the immediate use of his money, there is no gainsaying the fact that he gets a right to be compensated only way to compensate him is to pay him interest for the period of delay on the amount as was due to him on the date of his retirement. Again, as to what should be the rate of in our view, be generally 12% unless the circumstances of a particular case warrant the payment of a higher ”(emphasis added) Reliance in this regard may also be placed on the judgments urt in S.K. Dua vs. State of Haryana ate of Kerala vs. M. Padmanabhan Nair (1985) 1 Learned counsel for the respondents-Corporation, submits that the retiral dues have already been released to the petitioner after calculation At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner wishes to liberty to file a comprehensive representation with regard to his claim for grant of interest on the delayed disbursement of his pension/retiral benefits from the date of his retirement i.e. w.e.f. 31.01.2011, till the date of release of his pension i.e. 26.07.2019. Learned counsel representing the respondents assures the Court that in case the petitioner moves a representation seeking payment of interest tired employee to claim interest on the amount due. 9. Since a Government employee on his retirement becomes immediately entitled to pension and other benefits in terms of the uty is simultaneously cast on the State to ensure the disbursement of pension and other benefits to the retirer in proper As to what is proper time will depend on the facts and circumstances of each case but normally it would not exceed two which time limit has been laid in M. Padmanabhan Nair's case (supra). If the State commits any default in the performance of its duty thereby ney, there is no gainsaying the fact that he gets a right to be compensated only way to compensate him is to pay him interest for the period of delay on the amount as was due to him on should be the rate of 12% unless the circumstances of a particular case warrant the payment of a higher judgments S.K. Dua vs. State of Haryana ate of Kerala vs. M. Padmanabhan Nair (1985) 1 Corporation, submits that the retiral dues have already been released to the petitioner after calculation At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner wishes to liberty to file a comprehensive representation with regard to his claim for grant of interest on the delayed disbursement of his pension/retiral benefits from the date of his retirement Learned counsel representing the respondents assures the Court that in case the petitioner moves a representation seeking payment of interest PUNEET CHAWLA 2025.08.19 11:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document on his retiral benefits, the same will be decided in accordance with law within a period of 5. However, the petitioner will be at liberty to move a representation before the respondents seeking payment of interest on delayed disbursement of his pension/retiral benefits. In the ev representation, the respondent shall decide the same within a period of months from the date of receiving a certified copy of this order speaking order, decision taken thereof shall be conveyed to the petitioner. Needless to say, if the petitioner is found entitled to the relief sought, the same shall be granted forthwith by the respondents commencing fro of his pension i.e. 26.07.2019 6. disposed of. August 13, 2025 P.C 3 on his retiral benefits, the same will be decided in accordance with law within a period of three months. In view of the above, the present petition is However, the petitioner will be at liberty to move a representation before the respondents seeking payment of interest on delayed disbursement of his retiral benefits. In the event of the petitioner moving such a representation, the respondent shall decide the same within a period of from the date of receiving a certified copy of this order speaking order, after affording him an opportunity to be heard. decision taken thereof shall be conveyed to the petitioner. Needless to say, if the petitioner is found entitled to the relief sought, the same shall be granted forthwith by the respondents with interest commencing from the date of his retirement of his pension i.e. 26.07.2019. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stands disposed of. , 2025 Whether speaking/reasoned. : Whether Reportable. : on his retiral benefits, the same will be decided in accordance with law In view of the above, the present petition is disposed of However, the petitioner will be at liberty to move a representation before the respondents seeking payment of interest on delayed disbursement of his ent of the petitioner moving such a representation, the respondent shall decide the same within a period of three from the date of receiving a certified copy of this order by passing a an opportunity to be heard. Further, the decision taken thereof shall be conveyed to the petitioner. Needless to say, if the petitioner is found entitled to the relief sought, the same shall be granted with interest at the rate of 6.5% p.a. m the date of his retirement w.e.f. 31.01.2011 till the release Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stands (HARPREET SINGH BRAR) JUDGE Yes/No Yes/No on his retiral benefits, the same will be decided in accordance with law disposed of. However, the petitioner will be at liberty to move a representation before the respondents seeking payment of interest on delayed disbursement of his ent of the petitioner moving such a three by passing a Further, the decision taken thereof shall be conveyed to the petitioner. Needless to say, if the petitioner is found entitled to the relief sought, the same shall be granted .5% p.a. till the release Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stands (HARPREET SINGH BRAR) PUNEET CHAWLA 2025.08.19 11:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document