C.W.P. No. 12567 of 2011 [ 1 ] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH C.W.P. No. 12567 of 2011 Date of Decision: July 19,2011 Niranjan Singh ......................................... Petitioner Versus The State of Punjab and others ............... Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Ms. Justice Ritu Bahri 1.To be referred to the Reporters or not? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Present: Mr. Bhim Sen Sehgal, Advocate for the petitioner. ... RITU BAHRI, J. Inter alia contends that the petitioner was awarded punishment of removal from service vide order dated 22.12.1998 (Annexure P1). On appeal, the order was modified and the punishment of removal was substituted by stoppage of three increments with cumulative effect vide order dated 24.1.2000. The petitioner retired from service on 30.6.2001. He was not paid any pay and allowances from 22.12.1998 to 3.5.2000. He sent a demand notice on 16.8.2010 for release of the salary. The salary has been denied to him by the District Sainik Welfare Officer, Hoshiarpur, vide order dated C.W.P. No. 12567 of 2011 [ 2 ] 23.6.2000 on the ground that leave from 23.12.1998 to 26.3.2000 was extra ordinary leave without pay. Counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on a Division Bench judgment in Ex-Constable Kulwant Singh v. State of Punjab and others 2008(4) SCT 201 to contend that order of dismissal is set aside on merits. The employee is entitled to full pay and allowances for the intervening period. This judgment does not help the petitioner as in that case no penalty was imposed after dismissal order was set aside. In the present case the punishment of dismissal has been substituted by stoppage of three increments with cumulative effect and the order of the District Sainik Welfare Officer, Hoshiarpur, dated 23.6.2000 is as per Rule 7.3 of the CSR and calls for no interference. The petition suffers from delay and laches as the order dated 24.1.2000 (Annexure P2) whereby the petitioner was awarded punishment of stoppage of three increments with cumulative effect and also decided that the period of absence from duty shall be treated as leave of the kind due. This order has attained finality. Notice of demand was served on 16.8.2010 which is hopelessly time barred. Dismissed. 19.7.2011 ( RITU BAHRI ) Rupi JUDGE