IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Regular Second Appeal No. 2734 of 2009 Date of Decision : July 24, 2009 State of Punjab and others ....Appellants Versus Paramjit Singh .....Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.P.S. MANN Present : Mr. K.S.Sidhu, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab. T.P.S. MANN, J. Suit for declaration and mandatory injunction filed by the respondent herein, was partly decreed by the learned trial Court to the effect that except the gratuity amount and commutation of pension, he was entitled to the interest on the remaining delayed payments @ 12% per annum after giving six months period as processing period to the defendants-appellants herein, for each payment from the date each payment became due till the payment was made. First appeal filed by the appellants was dismissed by the learned Appellate Court except for slashing the rate of interest to 9% per annum. Hence, the present second appeal by the defendants. Learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that the Courts below did not properly appreciate the pleadings of the parties and the evidence R.S.A. No. 2734 of 2009 -2- brought on record. The plaintiff-respondent alongwith others had challenged his seniority by filing a suit which was decreed on 4.10.1993 and upheld in appeal on 8.10.1994. The respondent was held entitled to promotion from the date his juniors were promoted and also to pay and benefits. Order regarding seniority was thereafter passed on 16.4.1986 whereas the pay was fixed on 7.1.1997 as Superintendent Grade II and on 9.7.2001 as Superintendent Grade I. Although criminal proceedings pending against the respondent were decided in the year 2000, yet arrears of pay and allowances were duly paid to him. The departmental proceedings against the respondent were filed on 4.3.1994 whereas he retired on 31.10.1994 on attaining the age of superannuation. Therefore, there was no reason for withholding the remaining payments to which the respondent was entitled to, i.e., arrears of salary and leave encashment but not the gratuity amount. Under these circumstances, learned Courts below were justified in awarding interest to the respondent on the delayed payments. Learned Counsel further submitted that interest rate as awarded is highly exorbitant. Learned trial Court, while decreeing the suit, awarded interest @ 12% per annum on the delayed payments. Finding the same to be on the higher side, learned lower Appellate Court reduced/slashed it to 9% per annum. The same appears to be reasonable and does not call for any interference. R.S.A. No. 2734 of 2009 -3- The findings arrived at by the learned Courts below are neither perverse nor suffer from any illegality or infirmity. No question of law, much less substantial questions of law, as claimed by the appellants, arises for determination in the second appeal. Resultantly, the appeal is dismissed in limine. ( T.P.S. MANN ) July 24, 2009 JUDGE ajay-1