Punjab-Haryana High Court
Ram Narian vs State Of Haryana And Another on 16 February, 2012
Author: Rajiv Narain Raina
Bench: Rajiv Narain Raina
In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh
Letters Patent Appeal No. 1993 of 2011
Date of Decision: February 16, 2012
Ram Narian
---Appellant
versus
State of Haryana and another
---Respondents
Coram: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M.KUMAR
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV NARAIN RAINA
***
Present: Mr. J.S.Hooda, Advocate
for the appellant
Mr.Vinod S.Bhardwaj, Addl. Advocate General, Haryana
1. To be referred to the Reporters or not?
2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?
*** M.M.KUMAR J.
1. The instant appeal under Clause X of the letters patent is directed against the judgment dated 4.8.2011 passed by learned Single Judge. The only claim made by the appellant-writ petitioner is that he is entitled to payment of interest on the delayed payment of retiral benefits.
2. Admittedly, the appellant-writ petitioner superannuated on 30.11.2006 and his retiral benefits were paid on 27.8.2010, after he was exonerated in criminal proceedings on 25.2.2010. It is also evident that he was placed under suspension on account of registration of FIR against him and no departmental proceedings were initiated for infliction of any punishment under Haryana Civil Services (Punishment & Appeal )Rules, 1981. He was reinstated in service with effect from 6.1.2004. He Letters Patent Appeal No. 1993 of 2011 -2- requested for regularization of his suspension period in terms of Rule 7.3 of Civil Services Rules Volume-I Part-1 and superannuated on 30.11.2006 on attaining the age of 58 years.
3. Learned Single Judge has regarded the delay as justified on the ground that during the pendency of criminal proceedings the retiral benefits could have been withheld. However, once the charge has been found to be without any basis and he is acquitted, then the writ petitioner- appellant cannot be subjected to double punishment firstly, by harassing him in criminal proceedings and then by withholding his retiral benefits. Once he is exonerated then, by fiction of law, he has to be treated as innocent. Therefore, instead of relegating the appellant-writ petitioner to the remedy of civil suit to claim interest, as directed by the learned Single Judge, we follow the dictum of law as laid down by a Full Bench of this Court in the case of R.S.Randhawa v. State of Punjab and others 1997(3) RSJ 318 and award him interest at the rate of 8% per annum on the delayed payment of retiral benefits from the date the amount was due till the date of payment. The interest be calculated and paid within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
4. Appeal stands disposed of in the above terms.
(M.M.KUMAR) JUDGE (RAJIV NARAIN RAINA) JUDGE FEBRUARY 16, 2012 PARAMJIT