IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH L.P.A. No. 1292 of 2009 Date of decision: August 09, 2010 Dr. Avtar Singh Saini .. Appellant Vs. State of Punjab and others .. Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice M.M. Kumar Hon'ble Mr. Justice A.N. Jindal Present: Mr. Jagbir Malik, Advocate for Mr. Veneet Sharma, Advocate for the appellant. Mr. Suvir Sehgal, Addl. A.G. Punjab for the respondents 1. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the digest? M.M. Kumar, J The instant appeal filed under Clause X of the Letters Patent is directed against order dated 17.9.2009 passed by the learned Single Judge. The learned Single Judge has noticed that the appellant- petitioner joined Punjab Civil Medical Services through Punjab Public Service Commission on 21.2.1974 and thereafter in August, 1982 he was selected and appointed as Registrar in the department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Medical College, Amritsar. It was in the year 1985, he was promoted on the post of Senior Lecturer in the aforesaid department on the basis of seniority-cum- merit. Eventually, he stood promoted as Assistant Professor/Associate Professor in the same department at Amritsar. On 26.9.2006, after putting in 32 years of service, the appellant sent a communication to the respondent seeking voluntary retirement by furnishing three months salary. The aforesaid request was accepted. However, his case for retiral benefits was not finalised. Learned Single Judge noticed that the retiral benefits stood released to the petitioner in the month of January, 2009 and, therefore, the writ petition was rendered infructuous. When the instant appeal came up for hearing on 29.7.2010, learned counsel for the appellant argued that the retiral benefits released to L.P.A. No. 1292 of 2009 -2- *** the appellant have been calculated without adding the element of revision of pay scale given w.e.f. 1.1.2006. It was claimed that the retiral benefits released to the appellant must include the element of revision of pay scale and consequential revision in pension because it is conceded that the appellant stood retired w.e.f. 30.9.2006. There was no escape from the conclusion that he was entitled to higher amount of salary w.e.f. 1.1.2006 as well as retiral benefits on that basis. Mr. Sehgal, learned Additional Advocate General, Punjab does not dispute the aforesaid proposition. In view of the above, we direct that the pay of the appellant shall be revised w.e.f. 1.1.2006. He shall also be paid arrears of pay on the revised pay scale, if not already paid. Thereafter his retiral benefits be also calculated in accordance with the revised pay scale and the needful shall be done within two months from today. The appellant shall also be entitled to interest @ 12% per annum as stipulated by the Full Bench of this Court in the case of R.S. Randhawa v. State of Punjab, 1997 (3) RSJ 318 (FB) from the date the arrears of pay or pension were due till the date of payment. The appeal stands disposed of accordingly. (M.M. Kumar) Judge August 09, 2010 (A.N. Jindal) deepak Judge