--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Whether reporters of the Local papers are allowed to see the judgment? IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA. CWP No.7604 of 2010. Decided on: December 28, 2011. S.R. Chauhan, s/o late Sh. Kirpa Ram, r/o village Bagra, P.O. Gumma, Tehsil Kotkhai, District Shimla, , HP. …… Petitioner. Versus State of Himachal Pradesh through Additional Chief Secretary (Forests) to the Govt. of H.P., Shimla-2. ….Respondents. Civil Writ Petition under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India for releasing pensionary benefits alongwith interest. ____________________________________________________________ Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Surinder Singh, J. Whether approved for reporting? For the petitioner : Mr. Dilip Sharma, Advocate, For the respondent : Mr. A.K.Bansal, Addl. Advocate General. Surinder Singh, J (oral): By means of the present petition, the petitioner has sought the following reliefs:- 1. That the decision reflected in 13.10.2010, Annexure P-1, may kindly be quashed and set aside. 2. That the respondent may be directed to allow selection grade to the petitioner with effect from 1.1.1996 with all consequential benefits - 2 - including arrears of salary/ pensionary benefits, with interest at market rate on delayed payments. 3. That respondent may be directed to release an amount of Rs.10805/- withheld out of his gratuity when the same was paid to him in the year 1997, with interest at market rate on delayed payment.” 2. The petitioner joined service as Forest Ranger on 1.10.1961. He was inducted into H.P. Forest Service (HPFS) on 7.7.1979. He was not released selection grade for the reason that he was involved in a criminal case in terms of FIR No.69/77 pending trial. 3. Since the petitioner was not granted service benefits, as such, he had filed an O.A. No.31/90, which was allowed and only then the service benefits were released to him. 4. The petitioner retired on 31.4.1997 on attaining the age of superannuation, but the retiral benefits were not released to him, because of the pendency of the criminal case against him. But later, he was acquitted on 13.1.2004 by the learned Special Judge and the State appeal against the judgment of acquittal. The petitioner during the pendency of appeal made representation informing about his acquittal but he was declined selection grade and the retiral benefits on the - 3 - ground that the appeal is a continuation of the proceedings. He was accordingly informed vide Annexure P-1 dated 13.10.2010. 5. Now it is stated by the learned counsel for the petitioner that even the appeal of the State has been dismissed on 3.3.2011, therefore, the relief sought for can be granted to him. 6. As per interim order passed by the Principal Division Bench of this Court on 2.5.2011, respondent was directed to disburse the due and admissible benefits to the petitioner. 7. It is stated at Bar that during December, 2011, balance amount of DCRG and leave encashment were released to him, but however, the orders with respect to selection grade with retrospective effect were issued in June, 2011, but so far no consequential benefits have been released to him. This contention has not been rebutted by the learned Additional Advocate General. 8. Therefore, in view of the aforestated position, the impugned order Annexure P-1 dated 13.10.2010 is hereby set-aside and the respondent is hereby directed to allow the selection grade to the petitioner - 4 - with effect from the date it fell due with consequential benefits including the arrears of salary. 9. Further respondent is also directed to release the due and admissible pensionary benefits with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of retirement within four months from production of certified copy of the judgment to the respondent alongwith copies of acquittal passed by the Court(s), failing which it shall carry interest @ 12% p.a., as held in S.D. Bharwal vs. State of H.P. and Others [CWP No.2381 of 2009 decided on 7.9.2011] by this Court. 10. With this direction, the present petition is disposed of, so also the pending application(s), if any. (Surinder Singh ) December 22, 2012. Judge (Pds)