Allowed

Ravinder Singh Brar v. State of Punjab & Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC24 Jan 2018CWP/12967/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner claimed arrears of salary and retirement benefits retroactively adjusted to a higher pay scale. The court noted a departmental correction rectifying the base pay and directed the respondents to calculate and pay the consequential arrears of CPF and leave encashment with interest, giving two months to comply.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondents to pay arrears of CPF and earned leave encashment with 9% interest, calculated based on the corrected pay order dated 22.01.2018, within two months.

Ravinder Singh Brar Vs State of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Punjab & Haryana HC (2018)

¶1

CWP No. 12967 OF 2015

¶2

--1--

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

CWP No. 12967 OF 2015 DECIDED ON: JANUARY 24, 2018

¶5

RAVINDER SINGH BRAR

¶6

.....PETITIONER

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS

¶9

.....RESPONDENTS

¶10

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASPAL SINGH

¶11

Present: Mr. R.D. Anand, Advocate, for the petitioner.

¶12

Mr. TPS Chawla, DAG, Punjab.

¶13

¶14

JASPAL SINGH, J.(ORAL)

¶15

Through instant petition preferred under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has sought following relief:-

¶16

(i) to pay the arrears of salary on the basis of having fixed the basic pay at Rs.14940/- per month as on 01.01.1996 in the pay scale of Rs.12000-420-18300, for the period from 01.01.1996 to 28.02.1999 along with interest @ 9% per annum from the date the amount became due till the payment is made.

¶17

(ii) to pay the arrears of salary on the basis of

¶18

having fixed the basic pay at Rs.53970/- as on 01.01.2006 in the

¶19

Sonika 2018.02.01 15:21 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

¶20

--2--

¶21

CWP No. 12967 OF 2015

¶22

pay scale of Rs.37400-67000+9000 AGP from 01.01.2006 to 03.12.2009 (date of superannuation) with interest @ 9% per annum from the date the amount became due till the payment is made.

¶23

(iii) to pay the arrears towards employer's contribution to CPF, arising out of enhanced salary in terms of (i) and (ii) above, with interest @ 9% per annum from the date the amount became due till the payment is made.

¶24

(iv) to pay the arrears towards earned leave encashment, arising out of enhanced salary in terms of (ii) above, with interest @ 9% per annum from the date the amount became due till the payment is made.

¶25

On the last date of hearing i.e. on 08.01.2018, it came to light that letter No.SBAS/Revised Basic Pay/2013/122 dated 08.03.2013 was written to respondent No.2-Director Public Instruction (Colleges), Punjab, which was not responded or taken up for its consideration, on account of which, a direction was issued by this Court, as to why the said letter is still pending and has not been disposed of. It was only on account of aforesaid reason, the other benefits like CPF, leave encashment etc. could not be dealt with and disbursed to the petitioner.

¶26

Now, in compliance of aforesaid order dated 08.01.2018, reply by way of affidavit of Mr. Harjeet Singh, Director Public Instruction (Colleges), Punjab, Chandigarh on behalf of respondents No. 1 and 2 has been filed in Court today and same is taken on record.

¶27

Sonika 2018.02.01 15:21 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

¶28

CWP No. 12967 OF 2015

¶29

--3--

¶30

According to the contents thereof, pay of the petitioner was wrongly fixed vide order dated 01.09.2015 by fixing it w.e.f. 01.01.2006 at the stage of 51920/- instead of 53970/-. Further, in compliance of order of this Court, matter has been considered a fresh and now, pay of the petitioner has been refixed vide order dated 22.01.2018 (Annexure R-1) w.e.f 01.01.2006 at the stage of 53970/- by giving benefit of career advancement scheme w.e.f. 01.01.1996 and respondent-college has been directed to make the consequential admissible payments to the petitioner.

¶31

In view of the decision taken by the office of DPI College(s), Punjab, Chandigarh, aforesaid order has also been conveyed to the aforesaid colleges for its implementation.

¶32

Though, petitioner has claimed the revision of basic pay w.e.f. 01.01.1996 and subsequent thereto, aforesaid order reflected in para 4 of the order has already been passed. If, petitioner is still aggrieved of the order dated 22.01.2018 (Annexure R-1), he may approach this Court or the concerned authority for the redressal of his grievance(s).

¶33

As far as the arrears of CPF arising out of the enhanced salary in the light of aforesaid order dated 22.01.2018 (Annexure R-1) are concerned, the same shall be paid to the petitioner by the respondents No. 3 and 4 by calculating the same along with interest @ 9% from the date it became due till the payment is made.

¶34

Further, as far as the arrears with regard to the earned leave encashment arising out of the enhanced salary in terms of order dated 22.01.2018 (Annexure R-1) are concerned, the same shall be calculated by

¶35

Sonika 2018.02.01 15:21 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

¶36

--4--

¶37

CWP No. 12967 OF 2015

¶38

respondents No. 3 & 4 and be paid along with interest @ 9%, which shall thereafter, be recoverable by the college management from respondents No. 1 and 2. The entire exercise with regard to the calculation and disbursement of the aforesaid benefits shall be made within the period of two months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. In case, of non-compliance of the order(s) referred to above, petitioner shall be at liberty to approach this Court. 9. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the petition stands

¶39

disposed of.

¶40

JANUARY 24, 2018 (JASPAL SINGH) sonika JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes Whether reportable Yes/No

¶41

Sonika 2018.02.01 15:21 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

Ravinder Singh Brar v. State of Punjab & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ravinder Singh Brar v. State of Punjab & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Gindori Devi & Anr. Vs State of Haryana & Ors.

Didar Singh Vs State of Punjab & Ors.

Bal Krishan Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Harcharan Singh Bhatia Vs State of Punjab & Ors.

Mustaq Ali Vs State of Haryana

Jaspal Singh & Ors. Vs State of Punjab & Ors.