IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.3218 of 2011 Date of Decision : February 23, 2011. Sushil Kumar Jindal .....Petitioner versus State of Punjab and others .....Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT. Present : Mr.H.S.Sethi, Advocate, for the petitioner. -.- 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? --- Surya Kant, J. (Oral) Notice of motion to respondent Nos.1 & 2 only at this stage. Ms.Monica Chhibbar Sharma, learned Deputy Advocate General, Punjab accepts notice on their behalf. Let two copies of the writ petition be handed-over to her during the course of day. In view of the nature of order which I propose to pass, neither there is any necessity to issue notice to respondent Nos.3 nor any counter- reply from respondent Nos.1 & 2 is required at this stage. The petitioner has voluntarily retired from the post of Executive Officer of Nagar Panchayat, Zirakpur w.e.f. 1.9.2009. He has also served as Executive Officer and as an Accountant at different places C.W.P.No .3218 of 2011 2 including in the Improvement Trust, Ropar. The petitioner's grievance is that his retiral dues have not been released and the same are said to have been withheld on account of pendency of the disciplinary proceedings initiated against him vide charge-memo dated 19.8.2003 (Annexure P-1). The charge-sheet alleges that the petitioner has handed over the possession of SCF No.56, Dashmesh Nagar to its allottee without recovering the arrears of interest to the tune of Rs.7,13,772/-. The petitioner immediately replied to the charge-sheet on 29.10.2003 (Annexure P-2) and denied the allegations. He avers that no further action in the matter was taken till he retired from service, however, his retiral dues have been withheld for no other reason except the pendency of above stated charge-sheet even though the petitioner has reminded the authorities by serving a legal notice dated 4.10.2010 (Annexure P-5) also. Having heard learned counsel for the parties at some length, it appears that the disciplinary proceedings initiated in the year 2003 cannot be kept pending for an indefinite period nor the same can be a ruse to withhold the retiral duties. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of with a direction to respondent No.2 to dispose of the pending disciplinary proceedings initiated against the petitioner, as early as possible but not later than four months from the date of receiving a certified copy of this order. The claim of the petitioner for payment of retiral dues shall thereafter be decided within a period of one month. Similarly, the claim of the petitioner regarding payment of salary for the period he has worked, shall be decided within the stipulated period. C.W.P.No .3218 of 2011 3 Let a copy of this order be given dasti to Ms.Monica Chhibbar Sharma, learned Deputy Advocate General, Punjab for information and necessary compliance. Dasti. February 23, 2011 (SURYA KANT) Mohinder JUDGE