IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH CWP No.10244 of 2008 Date of decision: February 10, 2009 B.D. Gupta ... Petitioner Versus State of Haryana & another ... Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI Present : Mr. Rajinder Goyal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Harish Rathee, Sr. DAG, Haryana. *** 1. Whether Reporters of Local Newspapers 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? AJAY TEWARI, J.(Oral) The petitioner joined his services on the post of Deputy District Attorney and retired as Joint Director, Prosecution. 8 years after he retired he made a plea for counting his permissible period of practice towards pension. In the written statement it was mentioned as follows: “Therefore, as per above clarification, even if the petitioner had applied for this benefit while he was in service, he was entitled for counting of only 2 years and 4 months experience to his service qualifying for superannuation pension. But he had applied for this benefit only after about 8 years of his retirement, therefore, this benefit cannot be given to him at this belated stage. However, the reproduction of Rule is not disputed being matter of record.” It is thus clear that the respondents admit that the petitioner would have been entitled to count a period of 2 years CWP No.10244 of 2008 -2- 4 months towards service for pension but same has been denied only on account of delay for moving the application. There is catena of judgment to the effect that recurring rights such as pension cannot be completely denied on the ground of delay but the benefits accruing to such a person can be curtailed. In the circumstances, this petition is allowed and respondents are directed to count the admitted period of 2 years 4 months towards his pension and to refix his pension accordingly with effect from the month of March, 2008. However, keeping in mind the delay it is directed that the petitioner will not be entitled to any benefit like gratuity etc. and even the arrears of increased pension would be limited to a period of 38 months prior to the date the initial representation (i.e. 24.5.2006) was made. Let the necessary arrears be made within a period of three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. In case the payment is not made within the said period the petitioner would be entitled to interest on the arrears from 24.03.2003 till the actual date of payment @ 8% per annum. February 10, 2009 (AJAY TEWARI) sonia JUDGE