Civil Writ Petition No. 18270 of 2002 1 In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, at Chandigarh. Civil Writ Petition No. 18270 of 2002 Date of Decision: 20.11.2008 Varinder Kumar …Petitioner Versus Registrar, Panjab University, Chandigarh …Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA. Present: Mr. T.N. Gupta, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Anupam Gupta and Mr. Ashish Rawal, Advocates, for the respondent. Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia, J. (Oral) The petitioner is being represented by Mr. T.N. Gupta, Advocate. Present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner praying that the University be directed to pay leave encashment, admissible under the revised rules along with interest on leave encashment, and other retirement benefits due to the petitioner till the date of actual payment. It is submitted that petitioner was due to retire on attaining the age of 60 years in the year 1998. He was allowed to continue in service till attaining the age of 62 years i.e. upto 2000. It is not disputed that petitioner has been paid his retiral benefits i.e. leave encashment, gratuity and provident fund etc. The grievance of the petitioner is that no interest was given on the amount of leave encashment and gratuity, which was Civil Writ Petition No. 18270 of 2002 2 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 petitioner was to continue upto the age of 62 or not. Since the petitioner has worked actually upto 62 years of age, now his 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 2002. 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. Petitioner was working as senior member of Faculty of Panjab University. He retired in the year 1998. On the resolution passed by the University, he was allowed to continue for another two years i.e. upto year 2000. Their Provident Fund, leave encashment and other retiral benefits were not paid as he was continuing in service. He along with others 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 the age of 60 years be released to them by the Civil Writ Petition No. 18270 of 2002 3 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 he continued upto the age of 62 years and on completion of 62 years, retiral benefits were paid, no interest has been paid to him. 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 1998 to 1999 and no interest has been paid on the Provident Fund which was lying deposited with the University from the year 1999-2000. I find justification in this prayer. Since the Provident Fund was parked with the University, and interest was accruing to the University, therefore, petitioner is entitled to the interest at rate which was then permissible on the Provident Fund for the year 1999-2000. So far as the prayer regarding awarding of interest on leave encashment, gratuity etc. is concerned, same cannot be accepted because petitioner was working, it was only after severance of the relationship with University, the amount was to be paid to him. In the above terms, the present writ petition is disposed off. Civil Writ Petition No. 18270 of 2002 4 The payment of the interest of the Provident Fund only for one year i.e. 1999-2000 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”