IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No.259 of 1994 Date of decision : 28.03.2011 Sant Singh … Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and another …Respondents CORAM : HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE PERMOD KOHLI Present: Mr.Amit Jain, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms.Charu Tuli, Sr.DAG, Punjab. Permod Kohli, J. Petitioner initially joined the Govt. service on 10.8.1959 as a Lecturer in Government College, Malerkotla and then as Assistant Employment Officer/District Employment Officer. While working as such, the petitioner was inducted in the Punjab Revenue Service in July, 1964. On completion of 20 years of service, the petitioner applied for pre-mature retirement. However, claim of the petitioner for pre-mature retirement was not considered. This petition came to be filed seeking a direction for payment of pensionary/retiral benefits. Admittedly, during the pendency of the writ petition, the petitioner has attained the age of superannuation. Petitioner was to retire on 28.2.1994 as is evident from Annexure P-2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has in fact, attained the superannuation and has retired from service. The grievance of the petitioner is the non-payment of the retiral benefits by taking into consideration the service rendered in the previous government department from 10.8.1959. In the reply filed, it is stated that petitioner applied for pre-mature retirement vide application dated 17.8.1993. Department proceedings were pending against him and FIR No.115/1984 at Police Station, Ropar was also registered. In the replication, the petitioner specifically mentioned that he was acquitted from the aforesaid FIR vide judgment dated 4.8.1992. Thus, at the time when he applied for voluntary retirement, no FIR was pending against him. In so far as the question of departmental proceedings against the petitioner is concerned, nothing is stated in the reply regarding the outcome of the departmental proceedings against the petitioner. CWP No.259 of 1994 [2] Under such circumstances, the petitioner cannot be denied the pensionary/retiral benefits which he would have secured on his superannuation. In this view of the matter, this petition is disposed of with the following directions:- (i) To count the previous service rendered by the petitioner w.e.f. 10.8.1059 towards qualifying service for pensionary benefits. (ii) Release pensionary/retiral benefits if there is no legal impediment on account of any order in disciplinary proceedings if not already paid. (iii) If there is no order of imposition of any penalty in the disciplinary proceedings, the petitioner shall also be entitled to interest on the statutory rate on delayed payment of GPF/Gratuity and interest at the rate of 6% on delayed payment of other retiral benefits if not already paid. Let the entire amount be calculated and paid within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. ( Permod Kohli ) Judge 28.03.2011 sd