Civil Writ Petition No. 4399 of 2003 1 In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, at Chandigarh. Civil Writ Petition No. 4399 of 2003 Date of Decision: 20.11.2008 H.L. Vasudev and Others …Petitioners Versus Registrar, Panjab University, Chandigarh …Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA. Present: Mr. T.N. Gupta, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Anupam Gupta and Mr. Ashish Rawal, Advocates, for the respondent. Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia, J. (Oral) Petitioners No.1 and 2 are present in the Court. All the petitioners are being represented by Mr. T.N. Gupta, Advocate. Present writ petition has been filed by the petitioners praying that the University be directed to pay leave encashment admissible under the revised rules along with interest on leave encashment, provident fund and other retirement benefits due to the petitioners till the date of actual payment. It is submitted that petitioners were due to retire on attaining the age of 60 years in the year 1999. They were allowed to continue in service till attaining the age of 62 years i.e. upto 2001. It is not disputed that petitioners have been paid their retiral benefits i.e. leave encashment, gratuity and provident fund etc. The grievance of the petitioner is that no Civil Writ Petition No. 4399 of 2003 2 interest was given on the amount of leave encashment and gratuity, which was paid after two years. It has been further stated that interest for one year on Provident Fund alone has been paid and for second year no interest has been paid on Provident Fund. The University was not paying retiral benefits on the ground that no final decision was taken whether the petitioners were to continue upto the age of 62 or not. Since the petitioners have worked actually upto 62 years of age, now their only prayer is that interest be paid on the late payment of gratuity, leave encashment, furlough etc. The present writ petition was filed in the year 2003. Counsel for the petitioner has drawn my attention to Annexure P1, a decision of this court and stated that payment was made only because of the orders passed by this Court. Petitioners were working as senior members of Faculty of Punjab University. They retired in the year 1999. On the resolution passed by the University, they were allowed to continue for another two years i.e. upto year 2001. Their Provident Fund, leave encashment and other retiral benefits were not paid as they were continuing in service. They filed a writ petition in this Court bearing CWP No. 16241 of 2000 in which it was held as under:- “In the meantime, we do not find any impediment in the way of the University to release all the terminal benefits to the petitioners on the assumption that they had retired at the age of 60 years. Of course, the pay which has already been drawn by the petitioners for working for the period from 60 to 62 years cannot be recovered. Let the terminal benefits accruing to the petitioners on the assumption that they had retired at Civil Writ Petition No. 4399 of 2003 3 the age of 60 years be released to them by the University before the next date of hearing. This payment to the petitioners would be without prejudice to their rights in the writ petition. Adjourned to May 31,2001. Copy of this order, attested by the Special Secretary be given to Mr. Anupam Gupta as well as to Mr. Gurpreet Singh. Sd/- ( R, S. Mongia ) Judge April 25,2001 Sd/- ( K. C. Gupta ) Judge” Now the grievance of the petitioner is that if they continued upto the age of 62 years and on completion of 62 years, retiral benefits were paid, no interest has been paid to them. It is stated that the Provident Fund was lying deposited with the University and University was earning interest thereupon and University has only remitted interest of one year i.e. from 1999 to 2000 and no interest has been paid on the Provident Fund which was lying deposited with the University from the year 2000-01. I find justification in this prayer. Since the Provident Fund was parked with the University, and interest was accruing to the University, therefore, petitioners are entitled to the interest at rate which was then permissible on the Provident Fund for the year 2000-01. So far as the prayer regarding awarding of interest on leave encashment, gratuity etc. is concerned, same cannot be accepted because petitioners were working, it was only after severance of the relationship with University, the amount was to be paid to them. Civil Writ Petition No. 4399 of 2003 4 In the above terms, the writ petition is disposed of. The payment of the interest of the Provident Fund only for one year i.e. 2000- 2001 as per rate of interest permissible then be made within three months from the receipt of certified copy of the order. (Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia) Judge November 20, 2008 “mamta/DK”