Disposed¶19

Rajiv Kumar Nanda v. State of Punjab and Others

Punjab & Haryana HC16 Jul 2026CWP/21445/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

CWP-21445-2026; High Court of Punjab and Haryana; decided 16.07.2026; Justice Namit Kumar; Rajiv Kumar Nanda v. State of Punjab; Articles 226/227 Constitution of India; writ of mandamus; retiral benefits; pension dues; arrears; interest on delayed retiral benefits; pending representation 11.03.2026 Annexure P-2; speaking order; time-bound direction; opportunity of hearing; disposed of without merits.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondent No.4 to consider and decide the petitioner's representation dated 11.03.2026 (Annexure P-2) expeditiously by a speaking order after affording hearing, preferably within 03 months from receipt of certified copy of the order; decision to be conveyed to the petitioner; any entitlement to be granted within 01 month thereafter with reasonable rate of interest. ¶19

Rajiv Kumar Nanda Vs State of Punjab and… — Writ and Judicial Review | Punjab & Haryana HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶19

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner is entitled to payment of complete retiral benefits in all heads arising out of his service, along with arrears and interest on the delayed payment of retiral benefits (raised in the prayer; not decided on merits). +1 more

¶10

Court's answer

If on such consideration the petitioner is found entitled to the relief sought, it shall be granted to him within a period of 01 month thereafter, with reasonable rate of interest.

¶19

Ratio / Principle

Without going into the merits, the Court disposed of the petition with a direction to respondent No.4 to consider and decide representation dated 11.03.2026 (Annexure P-2) expeditiously by passing a speaking order after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, preferably within a period of 03 months from receipt of certified copy of the order, and to convey the decision taken thereon to the petitioner.

¶19

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Punjab and Haryana High Court (Namit Kumar J., oral) disposed of a writ petition filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India seeking mandamus for payment of the petitioner's complete retiral benefits in all heads, with arrears and interest on delayed payment. Without entering the merits, and as the petitioner's representation dated 11.03.2026 (Annexure P-2) was still pending, the Court directed respondent No.4 to decide the representation expeditiously by a speaking order after affording the petitioner an opportunity of hearing, preferably within 03 months of receipt of certified copy of the order, to convey the decision, and — if the petitioner is found entitled — to grant the relief within 01 month thereafter with reasonable rate of interest. Notice was accepted without objection by the State (respondents No.1 & 2) and by counsel for respondents No.3 & 4.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

115

¶3

CWP-21445-2026 Date of decision : 16.07.2026

¶4

Rajiv Kumar Nanda ....Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

State of Punjab and others ...Respondents

¶7

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAMIT KUMAR

¶8

Present: Mr. Rajeev Dev Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶9

NAMIT KUMAR J. (Oral)

¶10

The present petition has been filed by the petitioner under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, seeking issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to pay the complete retiral benefits in all heads to the petitioner arising out of his service along with arrears with interest on the delayed payment of retiral benefits.

¶11

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that for redressal of his grievances, the petitioner has submitted representation dated 11.03.2026 (Annexure P-2) to the respondents which is still pending consideration. He further submits that at this stage, the petitioner would be satisfied, if appropriate directions are issued to the respondents to consider and decide the said representation, by passing a speaking order, in a time bound manner.

¶12

Notice of motion.

¶13

Mr. Rohit Ahuja, D.A.G., Punjab accepts notice on behalf of respondents No.1 & 2-State. Mr. Neeraj Sharma, Advocate has put in appearance and accepts notice on behalf of respondents No.3 & 4.

¶14

VINOD KOTHIYAL 2026.07.16 16:26 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

¶15

-2-

¶16

CWP-21445-2026

¶17

They have no objection to the innocuous prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner.

¶18

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record of the case.

¶19

Without going into the merits of the case at this stage, the present petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No.4 to consider and decide representation dated 11.03.2026 (Annexure P-2) submitted by the petitioner expeditiously, by passing a speaking order after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, preferably within a period of 03 months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. Further, the decision taken thereon shall be conveyed to the petitioner. Needless to say, if the petitioner is found entitled to the relief sought, the same shall be granted to him within a period of 01 month thereafter with reasonable rate of interest.

¶20

(NAMIT KUMAR) 16.07.2026 JUDGE kothiyal Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether reportable: Yes/No

¶21

VINOD KOTHIYAL 2026.07.16 16:26 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

Rajiv Kumar Nanda v. State of Punjab and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajiv Kumar Nanda v. State of Punjab and Others

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

Manjinder Singh Vs State of Punjab and Others

Dilip Kumar Mehta Vs the Punjab State Federation of Cooperative Sugar Mills Ltd. and Ors.

Vijay Kumar Vs Punjab State Power Corporation Limited and Others

Charanjit Kaur and Anr. Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Gopal Singh Vs the State of Punjab and Ors.

Rajbir Singh Vs State of Punjab and Ors.