CWP No.16426 of 2009.doc - 1 – HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** CWP No.16426 of 2009 (O&M) Date of Decision: 09.09.2010 **** Manohar Lal . . . . Petitioner VS. State of Punjab and Others . . . . . Respondents **** CORAM : HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT **** 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. RK Dadwal, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. H.S. Brar, Addl. AG Punjab Mr. Rahul Sharma, Advocate for respondents No.3 & 4 ***** SURYA KANT J. (ORAL) (1). The petitioner retired from the post of Junior Assistant, Municipal Council, Fatehgarh Churian, District Gurdaspur w.e.f. 31.03.2009 on attaining the age of superannuation. He had more than 24 years of ‘qualifying service’ to his credit and as such is entitled to pension, Gratuity, Leave Encashment, Provident Fund and other retiral benefits. Since none of these service benefits were released, the petitioner has approached this Court. (2). Respondents No.3&4 have filed their reply/affidavit and as per their stand the provisional pension and the Provident Fund have since been released during the CWP No.16426 of 2009.doc - 2 – pendency of this writ petition. Rest of the retiral dues have not been admittedly released so far on the pretext that a departmental enquiry is pending since the year 2004. From the documents relied upon by respondents No.3 & 4, it is revealed that the Municipal Council claims to have suffered a loss of Rs.87725/- due to negligence of the petitioner. (3). Having heard learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the fact that the enquiry is still pending, I am of the considered view that there is no justification for the respondents to withhold most of the retiral dues of the petitioner merely on the assumption that he had caused loss of Rs.87752/-. Suffice it to say that the interest of the Municipal Council would be well safe-guarded if the petitioner furnishes an indemnity bond to make good the alleged losses, if any, found to have been caused by him. On furnishing the indemnity bond, the respondents are directed to release all the retiral dues within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. (4). Needless to say that the petitioner shall fully cooperate with the ongoing enquiry proceedings. (5). Ordered accordingly. (6). Dasti . CWP No.16426 of 2009.doc - 3 – (SURYA KANT) JUDGE 09.09.2010 vishal shonkar