CWP No.13120 of 2007 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. DATE OF DECISION: 14.9.2010 Smt.Sona Devi ...Petitioner VERSUS State of Haryana & others …Respondents CORAM HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE PERMOD KOHLI PRESENT: Mr.Naveen Daryal, Advocate for the petitioner Mr.RD Sharma, DAG, Haryana for respondents no.1 & 2 Mr.Amandeep Hooda, Advocate for respondent no.3 Permod Kohli, J. (Oral) Keeping in view the controversy involved and with the consent of the counsel, this petition is disposed of at motion stage. Husband of the petitioner, late Ram Pal was working as Salesman in the Dodpur Cooperative Debts and Sewas Samiti Ltd., Dodpur, District Panipat. He died while in service on 17.7.2006. The petitioner, widow of the deceased applied for grant of compassionate appointment for her son and CWP No.13120 of 2007 2 also for release of pensionary/retiral benefits, including family pension. It is alleged that despite various representations and requests, the respondents have not released pension, DCRG, leave encashment, Provident Funds, GIS and arrears of revised pay scale w.e.f. 1.1.1996 alongwith interest at the rate of 24% per annum. Respondent no.3, the contesting respondent has filed two sets of written statements. It is stated that there is no provision for grant of compassionate appointment and family pension under the Primary Coop. Credit and Service Societies Staff Service Rules, 1992. As far as the retiral benefits are concerned, it is stated that an amount of Rs.70408/- is payable on account of retiral benefits to the deceased Ram Pal, however, an amount of Rs.1,62,401/- is still recoverable. Respondents have also relied upon an award passed by the Assistant Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Panipat (Arbitrator) on 26.3.2001 whereunder an amount of Rs.27980/- is said to be recoverable from the deceased employee. I have heard learned counsel for the parties. Mr. Daryal has relied upon the judgment of this Court in the case of Krishna Devi vs. The State of Punjab and others,2003 (6) SLR 459. In this judgment, it is observed that recovery from retiral benefits can only be made after observing principles of natural justice. Admittedly, no opportunity of hearing was granted to the petitioner. In this view of the matter, this petition is disposed of with a direction to the competent authority to afford an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner and after granting such an opportunity, appropriate order for CWP No.13120 of 2007 3 recovery from the retiral benefits may be passed, in accordance with law. It is, however, made clear that respondents are not entitled to recover any amount more than the estate of the deceased that may have devolved upon the petitioner-widow. (PERMOD KOHLI) JUDGE 14.9. 2010 MFK