Allowed

R.K. Gupta v. State of Hry. & Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC24 Feb 2012CWP/15331/2005

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner sought payment of retirement benefits delayed due to corporate closure and alleged stock shortages. The court held that dues cannot be denied without a determined liability and ordered immediate release of dues with interest.

What did the court decide?

All retiral dues shall be released to the petitioner within six weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of the order with interest at the rate of 12% per annum.

R.K. Gupta Vs State of Hry. & Ors. — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Punjab & Haryana HC (2012)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH

¶2

CWP No.15331 of 2005 Date of decision February 24, 2012

¶3

R. K. Gupta, Junior Engineer

¶4

....... Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Haryana and others

¶7

........Respondents

¶8

CORAM:

¶9

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN

¶10

Present:Mr. P. S. Rana, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶11

Mr. Akshit Sharma, AAG., Haryana for respondent No.1.

¶12

None for respondent Nos. 2 and 3.

¶13

¶14

Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?No

¶15

To be referred to the reporters or not? No 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the digest?No

¶16

K. Kannan, J (oral).

¶17

The petitioner's claim for retiral benefits is being delayed on account of the fact that the petitioner had not handed over charge at the time when the Corporation was ordered to be closed by orders of the Court and when the Corporation was taken over by the Government of Haryana. The petitioner has retired from service on 29.3.2004 and he has submitted that he has not concealed any shortage or recovery at any point of time and has also given in writing that he would deposit any financial equivalent for value of goods lost, if it was legally permissible and without prejudice to his legal rights. The undertaking given by him is also reproduced as Annexure R-2/6. It is seen in intra

¶18

departmental communications that took place soon after his retirement that he has not accounted for stocks for 2,68,835.41 and towards T&P amount worth 27,96,919.35 P. Apart from the same, the office itself has admitted to the fact that there were no records of T&P account, MAS account and stocks account and the Managing Director has informed the SDO Workshop to make efforts to trace out the requisite files and fix a liability, if any. The grievance of the petitioner is that in spite of undertaking given by him that if he would be liable for any recovery that is legally permissible, no liability has so far been fixed and no form of enquiry has been conducted imputing any particular liability on the petitioner to any particular sum.

¶19

It shall be impermissible for the Employer not to pay the terminal dues on specious grounds that the employer was responsible for any loss, if the assessment of loss is not taken to its logical sequence of undertaking an enquiry and concluding the same within a reasonable time. In this case, the situation is made complex by the fact that the Corporation itself has been ordered to be closed even before the petitioner's service with the Government of Haryana came to termination by attaining the age of superannuation. A further dimension to the problem to which the petitioner cannot be made responsible is the inability of the organization to track the records relating to the T&P and Stocks Registers.

¶20

The petitioner is entitled to the relief of all the retiral dues, when no determination is made against the petitioner for any loss so far and the same shall be released to the petitioner within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of copy of the order with interest at the rate of 12% per annum. The writ petition is allowed on the above terms.

¶21

(K. KANNAN) JUDGE

¶22

February 24, 2012 archana

R.K. Gupta v. State of Hry. & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

R.K. Gupta v. State of Hry. & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Miss Pooja Ahluwalia Vs State of Punjab

Ram Parkash Verma Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Mahavir Singh Dhanda & Ors. Vs State of Haryana & Ors. (Decided Case)

Mukandi Lal Singla Vs United Commercial Bank and Anr.

Rakesh Arora Vs State of Punjab

Tarsem Singh & Anr. Vs State of Punjab & Anr.