IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA CWP(T) No. 4117 of 2008. Date of Decision : May 9, 2011 Padam Singh Katoch Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others Respondents Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Karol, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 No. For the petitioner : Mr. G. R. Palsra, Advocate, for the petitioner. For the respondents : Mr. Ram Murti Bisht, Deputy Advocate General for the respondents –State. Sanjay Karol, J. (Oral) The petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs:- “(i) To quash & set-aside the impugned charge-sheet at Annexure ‘PA’ dated 1.2.1995; (ii) To direct the respondent to pay to the applicant interest on his General Provident Fund dues as on 30.4.95 (A.N.) w.e.f. 1.5.95 to 28.2.97 @ 12%; (iii) To issue directions to the respondents to release Death-cum-Retirement Gratuity to the applicant with interest @ 12%; (iv) To further issue direction to the respondents to release the payment on account of un-availed earned leave to the applicant with interest @ 12%; Whether reports of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 (v) To also, direct the respondents to release the amount due to the applicant on account of Employees Group Insurance Scheme with interest of 12% per annum; (vi) To direct the respondents to produce the relevant record in the matter with copies to the applicant; and (vii) To grant such other consequential relief(s) to which the Hon’ble Tribunal may deem fit, just and proper the applicant is entitled to in the facts and circumstances of the matter alongwith cost of this application.” 2. Annexure-PA is the article of charges communicated to the petitioner with reference to the disciplinary proceedings initiated by the respondent/State. Petitioner has been charged of misconduct which has resulted into financial loss to the government. It is also apparent from Annexure-PA that the petitioner and other employees were charge-sheeted. 3. Respondents have opposed the petition on the ground that disciplinary proceedings are yet pending. Considering such contention this Court, on 22.11.2010 passed the following order:- “Supplementary affidavit filed in terms of order dated 4.10.2010. Six months time is granted to complete the disciplinary proceedings. Any stay order passed by the erstwhile Tribunal is modified to that extent. Disciplinary proceedings be completed latest by 30th April, 2011 and the case be listed on May 3, 2011.” 3 4. The time granted has since expired. No positive information is forthcoming as to whether the disciplinary proceedings stands completed or not. Consequently in these circumstances following directions are issued:- 1. Disciplinary proceedings, if not already completed, shall positively be completed within a period of three months from today; 2. If aggrieved, petitioner is at liberty to take recourse to such action as is permissible and available to him in accordance with law; 3. In the event of petitioner being absolved of the charged allegations or otherwise there being no other legal impediment, respondents shall release all retiral benefits to him within a period of three months from the date of such order, failing which, thereafter petitioner shall be entitled to interest @ 9% per annum; 4. It shall be open for the petitioner to approach the respondents for redressal of any surviving grievances/claims with respect to his retiral benefits which shall be considered and adverted to by the authorities in accordance with law. 5. Petition stands disposed of accordingly. (Sanjay Karol), Judge. May 9, 2011 (PK)