-1- Civil Writ Petition No.7561 of 2007. IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ... Date of Decision: April 22,2008. Surjit Chand ... Petitioner VERSUS Union of India and others ... Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA. HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHINDER PAL. 1. Whether Reporters of Local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not ? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest ? Present: Mr. Rajeev Anand, Advocate, for the petitioner. Ms. Ranjana Shahi, Central Government Standing Counsel, for the respondents. -.- MOHINDER PAL, J. The facts of this case, as can be gathered from the petition, are that the petitioner was enrolled in the Army on September 24, 1975 and discharged from service with effect from November 30,2002, as Subedar (Clerk) being placed in low medical category (permanent). The Release Medical Board had viewed disablement of the petitioner as `PRIMAY -2- Civil Writ Petition No.7561 of 2007. HYPERTENSION', aggravated by military service and assessed his disability at 20% for life and recommended him to be released in medical category S1H1alp2 (permanent) E1. No disability pension was granted to the petitioner as the P.C.D.A (P) Allahabad, in consultation with Medical Adviser (Pensions) stated that the disability which resulted in discharge of the petitioner from service was neither attributable to nor aggravated by military service, being constitutional in nature and not related to service. The petitioner was awarded terminal/pensionary benefits. Thereafter, the petitioner served a legal notice dated July 29, 2003, for reinstatement into service with all consequential benefits, grant of disability pension, promotion and honorary rank. When this legal notice was not decided, he filed Civil Writ Petition No.19747 of 2004 in this Court. This Court, vide order dated January 27, 2004, disposed of the writ petition with a direction to the respondents to take decision on the legal notice submitted by the petitioner. In compliance with the said order of this Court, legal notice dated July 29, 2003, served by the petitioner against his discharge from service was considered by the competent authority and he was reinstated into service in the rank in which he was discharged from service with effect from December 01, 2002 vide Annexure P-1 dated September 16, 2004. Consequent upon reinstatement into service, the petitioner joined his duty on October 30, 2004. The petitioner was thereafter given promotion as Subedar Major with effect from July 01, 2003. He was transferred to the pension establishment with effect from November 30, 2006, in the rank of Subedar Major on completion -3- Civil Writ Petition No.7561 of 2007. of 31 years and 02 months' service. It is the case of the petitioner that at the time of his retirement from service with effect from November 30, 2006, the respondent-Department took no steps for adjustment of the amount recoverable and payable to him. According to him, he is entitled to be paid much more amount than is required to be recovered, which was paid to him after his discharge with effect from November 30, 2002. In this petition, a prayer has been made for issuing a direction to the respondents to release the pensionary benefits of the petitioner. In the written statement filed by the respondents, it has been pleaded that the petitioner did not deposit any amount already drawn by him on account of pensionary benefits etc. before his reinstatement into service. He intimated to his Unit vide his petition dated April 20, 2005 (Annexure R-2) that he had spent the amount of pensionary benefits withdrawn by him and requested that the said amount amount may be liquidated from his future retiral benefits. We have heard Mr. Rajeev Anand, Advocate, appearing for the petitioner and Ms. Ranjana Shahi, Central Government Standing Counsel, appearing for the respondents and have gone through the records of the case. As noticed above, the petitioner was discharged from service on November 30, 2002 and was awarded terminal/pensionary benefits. Thereafter the petitioner was reinstated into service vide Annexure P-1 dated September 16, 2004. He joined his duty on October 30, 2004 after -4- Civil Writ Petition No.7561 of 2007. reinstatement. He was promoted as Subedar Major with effect from July 01, 2003. He retired as such with effect from November 30, 2006. Since his discharge from service with effect from November 30, 2002, till his reinstatement vide Annexure P-1 dated September 16, 2004, the petitioner remained engulfed in his efforts of taking legal remedies. He served legal notice dated July 29, 2003, which was not decided by the respondent- Department. He had to file Civil Writ Petition No.19747 of 2004 in this Court which was disposed of on January 27, 2004 with a direction to the respondents to decide the legal notice of the petitioner. The legal notice was decided about eight months thereafter reinstating the petitioner into service. In these circumstances, without dilating the matter any further, the respondents should have taken steps for the adjustment of the amount recoverable from the petitioner and payable to him at the time of his retirement from service with effect from November 30, 2006. In the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, the respondents should not have withheld the retiral benefits of the petitioner on the ground that the petitioner was liable to pay interest on the amount which had been paid to him as terminal/pensionary benefits etc., or that he did not deposit that amount with the respondent-Department after his reinstatement into service. Now, since November 30, 2006, i.e for more than one year and five months, the respondent- Department is withholding the pensionary benefits, gratuity and commutation etc. of the petitioner, depriving him of his right to use his hard-earned money and of the interest accruing to him -5- Civil Writ Petition No.7561 of 2007. on this amount. In para No.12 of the written statement, it has been stated as under:- “ xx xx xx Accordingly, Arty Records had forwarded LPC-Cum-Data Sheet to PCDA (P) Allahabad through PPO (Arty) vide their letter No.LG/101/JC- 214981 dated 06 November 2006 along with floated column No.47 RDR i.e, (Revenue debit and Remittance) demand for Rs.6,63,540/- for issue of corrigendum PPO. The arrears accrued to the petitioner on account of pension, gratuity and commutation etc. will be paid to the petitioner on receipt of Corrigendum Pension Payment Order from PCDA (P), Allahabad. However, in spite of our repeated requests/ DO letter No.1675/ DO/ 4/ Pen-1()A) dated 17 February, 03 March 2007 and even No. dated 20 April 2007, the PCDA (P) Allahabad instead of issuing PPO returned the LPC-Cum-Data Sheet. On 14 March 2007 petitioner forwarded a petition to Defence Minister for consequential benefits on his reinstatement into service.” Thus, the respondent-Department has withheld an amount of Rs.6, 63, 540/-, which was payable to the petitioner -6- Civil Writ Petition No.7561 of 2007. on November 30, 2006 at the time of his retirement. Further, regular pension of the petitioner is being withheld since November 30, 2006. In letter dated April 26, 2007 (Annexure R- 3) written by Accounts Officer (Pensions), Office of the P.C.D.A (P), Allahabad, to Col. Records, Artillery Records, Nasik Road Camp, Nasik, it has been mentioned that the petitioner drew pensionary awards to the tune of Rs.5, 13, 992/-. As such, the amount recoverable from the petitioner is less than the amount payable to him. Under these circumstances, without going into any further details, we allow this writ petition to the extent that the respondents are directed to adjust the amount recoverable from the petitioner towards the amount payable to him, avoiding the interest part, and pay the remaining amount to him within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. ( HEMANT GUPTA ) ( MOHINDER PAL ) JUDGE JUDGE April 22, 2008. ak