Allowed¶20

Jagjit Singh v. State of Punjab and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC4 Dec 2025CWP/10576/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

CWP-10576-2021, Jagjit Singh v. State of Punjab and others, High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh, decided December 04, 2025 by Justice Kuldeep Tiwari (oral). Interest on delayed gratuity; No Demand Certificate; retirement dues of a SubDivisional Officer; acquittal in FIR No.126 dated 17.06.2003 (Sections 406, 409, 120-B IPC; Sections 13(1)(d) and 13(2) Prevention of Corruption Act); gratuity of Rs.10,00,000/- sanctioned 15.01.2021, credited March 2021; 6% per annum interest awarded for delay from 20.08.2018, escalating to 9% per annum on default beyond two months; petition allowed.

What did the court decide?

Interest @ 6% per annum on the gratuity withheld from 20.08.2018 until its crediting in March 2021, to be released within two months, failing which the amount shall thereafter carry interest @ 9% per annum. ¶20

Jagjit Singh Vs State of Punjab and Ors. — Corruption | Punjab & Haryana HC (2025)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

258 CWP-10576-2021 Date of Decision : December 04, 2025

JAGJIT SINGH

-PETITIONER

V/S

STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS.

¶7

-RESPONDENTS

¶8

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP TIWARI

¶9

Present: Mr. Amarjit Singh Bedi, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶10

Mr. T.P.S. Walia, A.A.G., Punjab.

¶11

¶12

KULDEEP TIWARI, J. (ORAL)

¶13

Through the present writ petition, the petitioner seeks a direction to the respondents to pay interest on the delayed gratuity payment @ 12% per annum.

¶14

The petitioner retired from the respondent-department as a SubDivisional Officer on 30.11.2017. At the time of his retirement, he was facing criminal trial in FIR No.126 dated 17.06.2003, registered under Sections 406, 409, 120-B of the IPC and Section 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2) 88 of the Prevention of Corruption Act. He was, however, acquitted by the trial Court vide judgment dated 14.03.2018. It is not in dispute that the said judgment was never assailed by the prosecution. Pursuant to his acquittal, the petitioner was issued a “No Demand Certificate” on 20.08.2018, which was subsequently withdrawn on 04.10.2018 solely for seeking clarification regarding the correct spelling of the petitioner’s name. The clarification was furnished by the department on the very next day, i.e., 05.10.2018. Despite this, the “No Demand Certificate” was reissued only on

¶15

DEVINDER YADAV 2025.12.09 16:25 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment

¶16

CWP-10576-2021 2

¶17

06.10.2020, and thereafter, vide order dated 15.01.2021, gratuity of ₹10,00,000/- was sanctioned and ultimately credited to the petitioner’s account in March 2021.

¶18

The sequence of events clearly indicates that although the department was justified in withholding the gratuity until issuance of the “No Demand Certificate” on 20.08.2018, it unjustifiably delayed the release of gratuity thereafter by engaging in unnecessary correspondence concerning the spelling of the petitioner’s name, a verification that should reasonably have been completed at least six months prior to the petitioner’s retirement date. Therefore, there exists a clear and admitted delay on the part of the department in releasing the gratuity amount from 20.08.2018 until March 2021, when the payment was finally credited to the petitioner’s account.

¶19

Although learned State counsel attempted to justify the delay by stating that the department was considering filing an appeal against the judgment of acquittal dated 14.03.2018, he fairly acknowledges that no such appeal was ever filed.

¶20

In view of the above, this Court finds merit in the present writ petition and accordingly allows the same. The respondent-department is directed to pay interest @ 6% per annum for the period of delay in release of gratuity, i.e., from 20.08.2018 (date of issuance of the initial “No Demand Certificate”) until the gratuity was credited to the petitioner’s account in March 2021. The interest amount shall be released within two months from today, failing which it shall thereafter carry interest @ 9% per annum.

¶21

(KULDEEP TIWARI) December 04, 2025 JUDGE devinder

¶22

Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether Reportable : Yes/No

¶23

DEVINDER YADAV 2025.12.09 16:25 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment

Jagjit Singh v. State of Punjab and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jagjit Singh v. State of Punjab and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Nirmla Vs Presiding Officer and Others

Punjab Milk Plant and Diary Vs Presiding Officer

M/S Jai Ambey Rice Trading Co. Vs Union of India and Anr.

M/S Grand Windsor Resorts Ltd. Vs Employees Provident Fund Organization and Ors.

Jyoti Bhatia Vs Additional District Magistrate Cum Appellate Authority and Others

Puran Singh Vs Punjab Spinning and Weaving Mi