IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
AT CHANDIGARH
CWP No.10244 of 2008
Date of decision: February 10, 2009
B.D. Gupta ... Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana & another ... Respondents
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI
Present : Mr. Rajinder Goyal, Advocate
for the petitioner.
Mr. Harish Rathee, Sr. DAG, Haryana.
***
1. Whether Reporters of Local Newspapers may be allowed to see
the judgment?
2. To be referred to the Reporters or not?
3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?
AJAY TEWARI, J.(Oral)
The petitioner joined his services on the post of
Deputy District Attorney and retired as Joint Director,
Prosecution. 8 years after he retired he made a plea for counting
his permissible period of practice towards pension. In the written
statement it was mentioned as follows:
“Therefore, as per above clarification, even if the
petitioner had applied for this benefit while he was in
service, he was entitled for counting of only 2 years
and 4 months experience to his service qualifying for
superannuation pension. But he had applied for this
benefit only after about 8 years of his retirement,
therefore, this benefit cannot be given to him at this
belated stage. However, the reproduction of Rule is
not disputed being matter of record.”
It is thus clear that the respondents admit that the
petitioner would have been entitled to count a period of 2 years
CWP No.10244 of 2008 -2-
4 months towards service for pension but same has been denied
only on account of delay for moving the application. There is
catena of judgment to the effect that recurring rights such as
pension cannot be completely denied on the ground of delay but
the benefits accruing to such a person can be curtailed.
In the circumstances, this petition is allowed and
respondents are directed to count the admitted period of 2 years
4 months towards his pension and to refix his pension accordingly
with effect from the month of March, 2008. However, keeping in
mind the delay it is directed that the petitioner will not be entitled
to any benefit like gratuity etc. and even the arrears of increased
pension would be limited to a period of 38 months prior to the
date the initial representation (i.e. 24.5.2006) was made. Let the
necessary arrears be made within a period of three months from
the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. In case the
payment is not made within the said period the petitioner would
be entitled to interest on the arrears from 24.03.2003 till the
actual date of payment @ 8% per annum.
February 10, 2009 (AJAY TEWARI) sonia JUDGE