Satvir Mehta Vs State of Haryana and Others — Writ and Judicial Review | Punjab & Haryana HC (2025)

Satvir Mehta Vs State of Haryana and Others — Writ and Judicial Review | Punjab & Haryana HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

No substantive relief granted by the Court; liberty granted to the petitioner to approach the Employees' Grievance Redressal Committee constituted under the Haryana State Litigation Policy, 2025, which is to decide per this Court's rulings in CWP-2457-2025 and CWP-28761-2025 after hearing, within three months

Issue for consideration

Whether respondents No.1 to 3 were liable to be directed by mandamus to release the petitioner's retiral dues, namely gratuity, leave encashment, pension, one month pay in lieu of LTC for block 2020-2023, one increment w.e.f. 01.07.2021, and dearness allowance with arrears up to his retirement +2 more

Court's answer

In view of the respondents' submission that the petitioner's grievance stands substantially redressed, the present petition is disposed of.

Ratio / Principle

Liberty is granted to the petitioner to approach the Employees' Grievance Redressal Committee constituted under the Haryana State Litigation Policy, 2025, for redressal of his grievance, if any.

Key takeaways

If the petitioner avails the said remedy, the Committee shall consider the issues involved in the present petition and pass a speaking order in the light of this Court's judgments in CWP-2457-2025 (H.C. Sharma vs. State of Haryana and others, decided 30.07.2025) and CWP-28761-2025 (Ranjit Singh vs. State of Punjab and others, decided 25.09.2025), after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.ratio¶21
The entire exercise before the Committee shall be completed within three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of the order, and the decision so taken shall be duly conveyed to the petitioner.ratio¶24

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Punjab & Haryana High Court, CWP-8526-2023 (O&M), decided 03.11.2025 (Harpreet Singh Brar J., Oral). Retired employee Satvir Mehta prayed for release of gratuity, leave encashment, pension, one month pay in lieu of LTC for block 2020-2023, one increment w.e.f. 01.07.2021 and dearness allowance with arrears up to retirement (30.10.2021), and for certiorari quashing respondent No.2's order dated 14.03.2023 (Annexure P-22). Counsel for respondents No.2 and 3/Bank submitted the grievance stood substantially redressed: gratuity released with interest @ 7.40%, LTC and salary for August 2020 to October 2021 paid, and the remaining Rs.4,67,630/- adjusted towards the petitioner's outstanding loan liability; annual increment was denied under Rule 33 of the Haryana Civil Services (Pay) Rules, 2016 for failure to join duties from 19.08.2020 till retirement. The Court disposed of the petition, granting liberty to approach the Employees' Grievance Redressal Committee under the Haryana State Litigation Policy, 2025, to pass a speaking order in light of CWP-2457-2025 (H.C. Sharma vs. State of Haryana) and CWP-28761-2025 (Ranjit Singh vs. State of Punjab) after hearing, the exercise to conclude within three months, with entitlement, if found, to be honoured forthwith.

CWP-8526-2023 1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

252

CWP-8526-2023 (O&M) Date of decision: 03.11.2025

Satvir Mehta

....Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana and others

....Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARPREET SINGH BRAR

Present: Mr. Abhilaksh Grover, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Arun Kumar Singla, AAG, Haryana.

Mr. Rajvir Singh Sihag, Advocate for respondents No.2 and 3.

HARPREET SINGH BRAR J. (Oral)

Prayer in this writ petition filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, is for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus, directing respondents No.1 to 3 to release the petitioner’s gratuity, leave encashment, pension, one month pay in lieu of LTC for the block of 2020-2023, one increment w.e.f. 01.07.2021 and dearness allowance with arrears upto the date of his retirement (30.10.2021). Further a writ of certiorari has been sought, for quashing the impugned order dated 14.03.2023 (Annexure P-22) passed by respondent No.2.

MOHD YAKUB 2025.11.04 12:22 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Punjab & Haryana High Court, Chandigarh.

CWP-8526-2023

2

Learned counsel for respondents No.2 and 3/Bank, at the outset, submits that the grievance raised by the petitioner, in the present petition, has been substantially redressed and the gratuity, LTC and salary w.e.f. August, 2020 to October 2021, has been paid to the petitioner. The gratuity amount along with and interest @ 7.40% has been released while the remaining amount of Rs.4,67,630/- has been adjusted towards the petitioner’s outstanding loan liability. It is further submitted that the petitioner is not held entitled to the benefit of annual increment under Rule 33 of Haryana Civil Services (Pay) Rules, 2016 as he failed to join the duties in spite of the direction issued to that effect by the competent authority w.e.f. 19.08.2020 till the date of his retirement on 31.10.2021.

In view of the above, the present petition is disposed of.

However, liberty is granted to the petitioner to approach the Employees’ Grievance Redressal Committee constituted under the Haryana State Litigation Policy, 2025, for redressal of his grievance, if any. In case the petitioner avails such remedy, the said Committee shall consider the issues involved in the present petition and pass a speaking order in the light of the judgments rendered by this Court in CWP-2457-2025, titled as H.C. Sharma vs. State of Haryana and others , decided on 30.07.2025 , and CWP-28761-2025, titled as Ranjit Singh vs. State of Punjab and others , decided on 25.09.2025 , after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.

MOHD YAKUB 2025.11.04 12:22 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Punjab & Haryana High Court, Chandigarh.

CWP-8526-2023 3

The entire exercise shall be completed within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order, and the decision so taken shall be duly conveyed to the petitioner. Needless to say, if the petitioner is found entitled to the relief sought, the same shall be granted to him forthwith.

	(HARP	REET SINGH BRAR) JUDGE
03.11.2025 yakub
	Whether speaking/reasoned:	Yes/No
	Whether reportable:	Yes/No

MOHD YAKUB 2025.11.04 12:22 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Punjab & Haryana High Court, Chandigarh.