Kultar Singh v. Pepsu Road Transport Corporation

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARPREET SINGH BRAR Present :

Mr. Vikas Chatrath, Sr. Advocate with Ms. Tanya Bhurji, Advocate and Ms. Yaashica, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Danish Mangat, Advocate for the respondent. HARPREET SINGH BRAR , J. (Oral) 1.

The present petition has been filed under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari seeking quashing of impugned order dated 22.07.2022 (Annexure P-3), whereby the petitioner's claim for grant of interest on account of delayed payment of gratuity has been rejected. Further, a writ of mandamus has been sought for directing the respondents to release interest @ 18% per annum on

the delayed payment of gratuity to the petitioner. 2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner inter alia contends that the petitioner retired on 30.04.2016 after serving the respondent-Corporation for 22 years and was entitled for release of pensionary benefits on the date of his retirement but his gratuity was released after approximately six years i.e. on 19.04.2022. On the eve of his retirement, the petitioner was not facing any disciplinary proceedings. The claim of the petitioner for payment of interest on gratuity was rejected vide order dated 22.07.2022 (Annexure P-3). The petitioner served a legal notice dated 23.03.2022 and also filed CWP-11678-2022, which was disposed of vide order dated 27.05.2022 (Annexure P-2) with a direction to decide the legal notice dated 23.03.2022 within a period of eight weeks.

Learned counsel for the petitioner relies upon the judgment rendered by this Court in CWP-15306-2016 titled as Hari Ram v. Pepsu Road Transport Corporation, decided on 04.09.2017. Further, the charge sheet issued on 03.09.2010 was kept pending for more than 11 years and was only decided after the retirement of the petitioner i.e. on 11.11.2021, violating the right of the petitioner for getting the disciplinary proceedings decided within a reasonable time. The petitioner has already filed a civil suit in the year 2024 challenging the order of punishment dated 11.11.2021, in which recovery of 1/4th share from the payable pension for one year was ordered, which was dismissed by the Civil Court, vide judgment and decree dated 28.02.

order dated 15.04.2024 by the learned first appellate Court, as discernible from Annexure P-5. Learned counsel 3.

Learned counsel for the respondents reiterates the stand taken in the speaking order (Annexure P-7) and submits that the delay has occurred due to pendency of departmental proceedings against the petitioner.

HARPREET SINGH BRAR Sima