HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU WP(C) No. 2311/2025 Gulab Singh …..Petitioner(s) Through: Mr. O. S. Bandral, Advocate. Vs UT of J&K & Ors. .….Respondent(s) Through: Mr. Dewakar Sharma, Dy. AG. Ms. Chetna Manhas, Assisting Counsel vice Mrs. Monika Kohli, Sr. AAG. CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY DHAR, JUDGE ORDER (24.02.2026) 01. The petitioner, through the medium of the present petition, has sought release of pending salary w.e.f., June, 2017 to July, 2018 along with CPF. The petitioner claims that he is the retired employee of the respondent-J&K State Handloom Development Corporation Ltd (hereinafter to be referred to as “respondent-Corporation”) and he has superannuated from service on 31.03.2021. It has been submitted that despite his retirement from service, the respondents have not released the withheld salary in his favour. 02. In their reply, the respondents have not disputed the claim of the petitioner and they have also not disputed the fact that the petitioner is an ex-employee of respondent-Corporation. It has been submitted that the respondent-Corporation is not in a Serial No. 08 Regular List 2 WP(C) No. 2311/2025 position to clear the retiral benefits/withheld salary of the employees due to the non-availability of sufficient funds. 03. The respondents have taken a stand that financial health of the respondent-Corporation is not in good shape and it is dependent upon financial support from the Government for clearing the liabilities of its employees. It has been submitted that as and when the funds would be arranged, the pending salary of the petitioner would be released in his favour. 04. Heard and considered. 05. From the pleadings of the parties, as narrated hereinbefore, it is clear that there is no dispute to the fact that withheld salary has not been released in favour of the petitioner by the respondents. The only ground that has been taken by the respondent-Corporation for denying the unpaid salary is that financial health of the respondent-Corporation is not in good shape. 06. The aforesaid ground projected by the respondents is not tenable in law because entitlement of an employee to his salary is not a bounty but it is his legal right which he has earned by serving the employer. It does not lie in the mouth of the respondent-Corporation to delay the payment of terminal benefits/unpaid salary to its employees, particularly when the employment of the petitioner is not pensionable in nature. If the financial health of the respondent-Corporation is not in good 3 WP(C) No. 2311/2025 shape, it has either to seek the help of the Government or to dispose of its assets but in no case they can withhold the payment of terminal benefits/pending salary to its employees. 07. In view of the above, the writ petition is allowed and the respondents are directed to release the pending salary in favour of the petitioner w.e.f., June, 2017 to July, 2018 along with CPF within a period of two months from the date a copy of this order is made available by the petitioners to the respondents. In default, the amount due shall carry interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the writ petition to the date of its realization. 08. Disposed of accordingly. (SANJAY DHAR) JUDGE JAMMU 24.02.2026 Naresh/Secy Naresh Kumar 2026.02.10 23:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document