Rajpal vs State Of Haryana And Others

CWP-35927-2026 (O&M) 1 of 10
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
117 CWP-35927-2026 (O&M)
Date of decision: 02.11.2026
Rajpal ...Petitioner(s)
Vs.
State of Haryana and others ...Respondent(s)
CORAM: HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA
Present:- Mr. Shilak Ram Hooda and
Mr. Rakesh Kumar Chauhan, Advocates
for the petitioner.
Mr. Harish Kumar Nain, D.A.G., Haryana.
*
NIDHI GUPTA, J.
Present Civil Writ Petition under Articles 226/227 of the
Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner for issuance of a writ
in the nature of certiorari quashing impugned office order dated
21.1.2026 (Annexure P-6) passed by respondent no.2 denying the
legitimate entitlement of interest on his delayed payment of retiral
benefits and amount of commutation of his pension being arbitrary,
cryptic, unlawful, illegal and detrimental to the rights of the petitioner in
the interest of justice; AND Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus
directing respondent authorities to grant interest atleast @ 9% per annum
upon the delayed payment of his retiral benefits given in the body of the
writ petition despite representation dated 20.4.2025 Annexure P-4, the
respondent authorities are not granting the interest on delayed payment
DIVYANSHI
2026.11.03 17:36
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document

CWP-35927-2026 (O&M) 2 of 10
of retiral benefits along with compensation worth Rs. 10 lakhs in the
interest of justice; AND for issuance of directions to the respondent
authorities to sanction amount of commutation of pension to the
petitioner along with interest thereupon for delayed payment w.e.f.
01.9.2023 till actual realization.
2. It is inter alia submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner
that facts in chronological sequence are as follows: -
27.03.1991: Petitioner was appointed as Junior Auditor in the respondent-
Department on 27.03.1991.
31.08.2023: Petitioner had superannuated on 31.08.2023.
1.9.2023 : Therefore, w.e.f. 01.09.2023, petitioner was entitled for
payment of Rs.27,33,512 towards GPF; Rs.8,30,740/- towards Leave
encashment; Rs.13,49,953/- towards Gratuity; and Rs.11,42,968/- towards
commutation of pension.
23.11.2023 : However, GPF was credited to the account of the petitioner
only on 23.11.2023 as evident from Bank account statement of the
petitioner (Annexure P-2).
16.12.2024: Vide order dated 16.12.2024 (Annexure P-3), respondent
No.4 has sanctioned 300 days of leave encashment to the petitioner.
19.03.2025: However, Pension Payment Order (Annexure P-1) was issued
to the petitioner only on 19.03.2025.
20.04.2025: Ld. Counsel submits that on account of the aforesaid delayed
payment, petitioner was entitled to interest on the same. Accordingly,
DIVYANSHI
2026.11.03 17:36
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document

CWP-35927-2026 (O&M) 3 of 10
petitioner had submitted a Representation dated 20.04.2025 (Annexure P-
4) claiming interest on the delayed payment.
20.05.2025: Thereafter, monthly pension of the petitioner was started on
20.05.2025. On the same date, Rs.7,89,568/- was paid to the petitioner as
arrears of monthly pension.
15.10.2025: As no action was taken by the respondents in respect of
aforesaid claim of the petitioner, petitioner had approached this Court by
way of CWP-28736-2025 titled as Rajpal vs. State of Haryana and others;
which was disposed of vide order dated 15.10.2025 (Annexure P-5)
directing the respondents to decide Representation dated 20.04.2025
(Annexure P-4) within a period of 8 weeks.
21.01.2026: However, vide the impugned order dated 21.01.2026
(Annexure P-6), respondents have denied the claim of the petitioner on
spurious grounds that delay was caused by the petitioner in not
submitting the requisite documents within time.
24.07.2026: Hence, present Writ Petition has been filed on 24.07.2026.
3. Ld. Counsel argues that all the documents sought by the
respondents were already available with the respondents in their office.
Yet, petitioner had submitted them in time. Hence, there was no delay on
the part of the petitioner. Moreover, petitioner had not received any
communication from the respondents asking him to submit the
documents.
4. Ld. Counsel further submits that petitioner was liable to be
paid to Rs.11,42,968/- as commutation of pension, which has not been
DIVYANSHI
2026.11.03 17:36
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document

CWP-35927-2026 (O&M) 4 of 10
paid till date. It is contended that after calculating delay in payment of
each retiral benefits and calculating interest @ 9% p.a., petitioner is
entitled to Rs.3,99,942.89 approximately; and petitioner is also entitled to
Rs.10 lakhs by way of compensation.
5. It is accordingly prayed that the present Writ Petition be
allowed; and following prayers be accepted: -
“i) Issue a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing impugned
office order dated 21.1.2026 Annexure P-6 being arbitrary,
discriminative, illegal, unlawful and detrimental to the
legitimate rights of the petitioner grant of interest on the
delayed payment of his retiral benefits and amount of
commutation of pension in the interest of justice.
ii) issue of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing
respondent authorities to grant interest atleast @9% per
annum upon the delayed payment of his retrial benefits given
in the body of the writ petition despite representation dated
20.4.2025 Annexure P-4 the respondent authorities are not
granting the interest on delayed payment of retrial benefits
along with compensation worth Rs.10 lakhs in the interest of
justice.
iii) issue of directions to the respondents authorities to
sanction amount of commutation of pension to the petitioner
along with interest thereupon for delayed payment w.e.f.
01.9.2023 till actual realization in the interest of justice.”
6. Per contra, learned State Counsel appearing on advance
notice, has vehemently opposed submissions advanced of the petitioner
and has submitted that the impugned order dated 21.01.2026 (Annexure
DIVYANSHI
2026.11.03 17:36
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document

CWP-35927-2026 (O&M) 5 of 10
P-6) is a speaking order wherein cogent reasons have been cited for
rejecting claim of the petitioner for interest on delayed payment. He
accordingly prays for dismissal of the present Writ Petition.
7. No other argument has been raised on behalf of learned
counsel for the parties. I have heard learned counsel and perused the case
file in detail. I find no merit in the submissions of the petitioner.
8. Petitioner had filed the previous CWP-28736-2025 titled as
Rajpal vs. State of Haryana and others with the following prayers: -
“Civil Writ Petition under Articles 226 of the Constitution of
India praying for issuance of a writ in the nature of
mandamus directing respondent authorities to grant interest
atleast @9% per annum upon the delayed payment of his
retrial benefits given in the body of the writ petition despite
representation dated 20.4.2026 (Annexure-4) the respondent
authorities are not granting the interest on delayed payment
of retrial benefits along with compensation worth Rs.10 lakhs
in the interest of justice.
AND
For issuance of directions to the respondents authorities to
sanction amount of commutation of pension to the petitioner
along with interest thereupon for delayed payment w.e.f.
01.09.2023 till actual realization in the interest of justice."
9. As noted above, the said Writ Petition was disposed of by a
Coordinate Bench vide order dated 15.10.2025 (Annexure P-5) directing
the respondents to decide the Representation dated 20.04.2025
(Annexure P-4) in accordance with law within a period of 8 weeks.
DIVYANSHI
2026.11.03 17:36
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document

CWP-35927-2026 (O&M) 6 of 10
10. Pursuant thereto, impugned order dated 21.01.2026
(Annexure P-6) has been passed rejecting the claim of the petitioner for
interest primarily on the ground that there was delay on part of the
petitioner in submitting the necessary required documents. The relevant
extract of the impugned order reads as under: -
“1. The petitioner Rajpal, Junior Auditor was asked to make
available certain documents required for retiral benefits after
his retirement on 31.8.2023: - Aadhar card, Affidavit, PAN-4
form, details of bank account, family identity card of
petitioner, his own Aadhar cards of dependents, PAN card and
to get the registration made by coming present before ODMS
so that after registration, his pension case may be forwarded
online on the site of Auditor General Haryana Chandigarh.
The petitioner did not complete aforesaid process in time.
2. The petitioner did not make available the requisite
documents for pension in the office of undersigned and the
aforesaid documents were sought from the petitioner vide
letter no.2588/PA/pension clerk dated 19.12.2023 and vide
letter no.2876/EA/Pension clerk dated 10.01.24 and vide
letter no. 3505/EA/Pension clerk dated 19.3.2023 but he did
not send the documents.
3. The petitioner made available the requisite documents in
the month of January 2025 after a period of more than one
year from his retirement. The proof of this is that the affidavit
has been attested on 15.1.2025 by public notary. Form Pen-2
uploaded by the petitioner on the site of ODMS for
registration on 18.2.2025.
4. Thereafter one month had been consumed for releasing in
the process of pensionary benefits after receiving requisite
DIVYANSHI
2026.11.03 17:36
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document

CWP-35927-2026 (O&M) 7 of 10
documents resultantly the PPO was issued on 19.3.2025 by
the office of AG, Haryana.
5. It is envisaged here that the commutation of pension is
granted on the request of the retiree and govt. recover
interest on this amount because this amount is a debt.
6. The petitioner is seeking interest on this amount also.
As per office record it has also been learnt that
annexure p-4 dated 20.4.2025 which has been directed to be
decided by the Hon'ble High Court by a speaking order has
not been received. The office of General Manager Haryana
Roadways, Rohtak in the letter dated 15.12.2025 has
contemplated that such representation has not been
presented by the petitioner in the office.
Despite this as per Haryana Civil Service (Pension)
Rules 2016 Rule No.71 provides that Form pension-2 is
mandatory to be submitted in the office by the employee who
is going to retire. In this way it is evident from the point-wise
detailed comments of GM, Haryana Roadways Rohtak that
the petitioner did not submitted the requisite documents like
affidavit, Aadhar card, Affidavit, PAN-4 form, details of bank
account, family identity card of petitioner, his own Aadhar
cards of dependents, PAN card for pensioner benefits even
after several letters. The affidavit is attested on 15.1.2025 by
the notary public. Despite aforesaid the petitioner had
claimed interest on the amount of commutation pension
which is not justified as per rules because the amount of
commutation of pension is granted to the employee on his
request because this is advance that in kind.
The opportunity of personal hearing was afforded by
the undersigned in compliance of Hon'ble High Court order on
29.12.2025 but the petitioner could not come present for
DIVYANSHI
2026.11.03 17:36
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document

CWP-35927-2026 (O&M) 8 of 10
hearing nor he apprised this office regarding his absence on
that day. Thereafter keeping in view the natural justice he
was granted one more opportunity to come present on
8.1.2026 for personal hearing. The petitioner appeared on
that day and he was heard. No evidence was presented by
the petitioner to the effect that he made available the
documents in the concerned office required for grant of
pensionary benefits to him in time during his hearing. Despite
this when the petitioner was asked about his representation
dated 20.4.2025 he did not respond and he had no evidence
to show that the representation dated 20.4.2025 was
submitted by him in the Head Office. No delay is committed in
releasing pensionary benefits to the petitioner.
Therefore, it is clear aforesaid facts that the petitioner
had not submitted requisite documents for grant of
pensionary benefits to him even after repeated
correspondence from the office of General Manager, Haryana
Roadways Rohtak whereas in rule 71 of Haryana Civil Services
(Pension) Rules -2016 clearly provides that making available
form Pan-2 in the concerned office is the responsibility of the
employee but the petitioner did not submit the documents in
the office in time. The petitioner submitted requisite
documents in the month of January regarding pension in the
Rohtak office and on this the Office of Auditor General
Haryana release pensionary benefits to the petitioner vide
letter dated 19.3.2025. Therefore finding no merits in the
representation dated 20.4.2025 appended with the aforesaid
CWP as Annexure P-4 by Rajpal Junior Auditor (Retd.)
Haryana Roadways Rohtak. I order to file the aforesaid
representation.” (Emphasis added)
DIVYANSHI
2026.11.03 17:36
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document

CWP-35927-2026 (O&M) 9 of 10
11. Learned counsel for the petitioner has failed to controvert
the facts as stated above in the impugned order dated 21.01.2026 (P-6).
12. Furthermore, Ld. Counsel for the petitioner has stated that
the aforesaid communications dated 19.12.2023, 10.01.2024, and
19.03.2023 were never received by the petitioner. However, petitioner is
unable to point out any such averment to this effect in the present Writ
Petition. In any event, as pointed out in para 3 of the impugned order
dated 21.01.2026 (Annexure P-6), it is not disputed that the requisite
documents have been made available by the petitioner only one year after
his retirement vide the Affidavit dated 15.01.2025. Consequentially, it
cannot be held that any delay was caused by the respondent-Department
in granting retiral benefits to the petitioner. As such, petitioner is not
entitled to interest on the delayed payment as the delay is demonstrated
to have been caused by the petitioner himself.
13. As regards the commutation of pension, as mentioned in the
impugned order dated 21.01.2026 (Annexure P-6), the same is granted on
the request of the retired Government employee. Ld. Counsel for the
petitioner has submitted that he may be permitted to make a
Representation. Needless to say, there is nothing that forbids the
petitioner from making a request in this regard with the respondent-
Department in accordance with law.
14. Keeping in view the above, I find no merit in the present Writ
Petition.
DIVYANSHI
2026.11.03 17:36
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document

CWP-35927-2026 (O&M) 10 of 10
15. Consequentially, the present Writ Petition stands dismissed .
16. Pending application(s) if any also stand(s) disposed of.
02.11.2026 (NIDHI GUPTA)
Divyanshi
JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No
Whether reportable: Yes/No
DIVYANSHI
2026.11.03 17:36
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document