9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (1) TMI 973X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a. According to him, he joined the service in Irrigation Department of the erstwhile State of Punjab in August, 1961 and was allocated to the Department of Irrigation and Power in the State of Haryana. He was promoted as Engineer- in-Chief on May 31, 1996 and worked in that capacity till he attained the age of superannuation in June, 1998. The appellant had an unblemished record of service for 37 years. During the course of his duties as Head of the Department, he submitted reports in or about April-May, 1998 to the Government highlighting certain irregularities and mal- practices said to have been committed by Mr. S.Y. Quraishi, the then Secretary, Irrigation Power and requested the Government to make enquiry through Central Bureau of In ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eafter given to him between June 11 and July 18, 2002. Thus, according to the appellant though he retired in June, 1998, retiral benefits to which he was otherwise entitled, were given to him after four years of his superannuation. 5. The appellant has stated that, in the aforesaid circumstances, he was entitled to interest on the amount which had been withheld by the respondents and paid to him after considerable delay. He, therefore, made several representations. He also issued legal notice on June 3, 2005 claiming interest at the rate of 18% per annum for delayed payment. He had invited the attention of the Government to Administrative Instructions issued by the Government under which an employee is entitled to claim interest. Even ot ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d in the interest of the Government and saved public exchequer by inviting the attention to mal- practices committed by high ranking officers. As a measure of revenge against the appellant, charge-sheets were issued, but after considering the explanation submitted by the appellant, all proceedings against him were dropped. In view of exoneration of the appellant, the Government ought to have paid interest on retiral benefits which were given to him after long time. As per the Guidelines and Administrative Instructions issued by the Government, the appellant was entitled to such benefit with interest. The High Court ought to have allowed the writ petition of the appellant and ought to have awarded those benefits. It was, therefore, submitted ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for the parties, in our opinion, the appeal deserves to be partly allowed. It is not in dispute by and between the parties that the appellant retired from service on June 30, 1998. It is also un-disputed that at the time of retirement from service, the appellant had completed more than three decades in Government Service. Obviously, therefore, he was entitled to retiral benefits in accordance with law. True it is that certain charge- sheets/ show cause notices were issued against him and the appellant was called upon to show cause why disciplinary proceedings should not be initiated against him. It is, however, the case of the appellant that all those actions had been taken at the instance of Mr. Quraishi against whom serious allegations of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... even without issuing notice to the respondents. 12. To us, the plea of the learned counsel for the appellant that the High Court ought to have entered into the merits of the matter which is based on documentary evidence is well-taken. In our considered view, the writ petition ought to have been admitted by issuing Rule nisi and ought to have been decided on merits. The High Court, however, dismissed the petition by a cryptic order which reads thus: The petitioner seeks only payment of interest on the delayed payment of retiral benefits. We, however, relegate the petitioner to avail of his remedies before the Civil Court, if so advised. Dismissed with the above observations. 13. The order passed by the High Court, therefore, mus ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of facts and circumstances, we request the High Court to give priority to the case and decide it finally as expeditiously as possible, preferably before June 30, 2008. 15. For the foregoing reasons, the appeal is partly allowed. The order passed by the High Court is set aside and the matter is remitted to the High Court for fresh disposal in accordance with law. In the facts and circumstances of the case, however, there shall be no order as to costs. 16. Before parting with the matter, we may clarify that we may not be understood to have expressed any opinion on the merits of the matter, one way or the other. As and when the writ petition will be placed before the High Court, it will be decided on its own merits without being influenc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
