Facts
The petitioner, a retired Principal Scientist who had served in the University’s AICRP on Agroforestry, claimed ₹18,60,374 as her 75% share of pay arrears arising from implementation of the Seventh Central Pay Commission.
Source reference: pp. 2–6The University had calculated that amount and sought the corresponding grant from the funding agency, CAFRI/ICAR, which released ₹45 lakh in March 2023, including the petitioner’s arrears, for disbursement under the pay head during financial year 2022–23.
Source reference: pp. 2–6Instead of paying the employees, the University transferred the amount to its Centralized Fund Scheme account and later issued a utilization certificate to the funding agency.
Source reference: pp. 7–9The petitioner’s requests for payment were unsuccessful; the University maintained that payment awaited State Government instructions.
Source reference: pp. 7–9In the writ proceedings, the State Finance Department stated that it had not barred the University from disbursing the ICAR-funded component and had assumed no liability for that component.
Source reference: pp. 10–11Issues
1. Whether the University could withhold the petitioner’s ICAR-funded share of pay arrears after seeking and receiving the grant specifically for that purpose.
Source reference: pp. 12–162. Whether the petitioner was entitled to payment of the admitted arrears with interest and costs.
Source reference: p. 16Law Applied
The judgment cited no specific statute, service rule, or precedent. It applied the principle that funds received for a specified purpose must be used for that purpose: where an institution has sought and received a grant earmarked for identified employees’ pay arrears, it must disburse the funds accordingly and cannot withhold or divert them to its own account without lawful authority or justification.
Source reference: pp. 13–16The Court also treated the State’s phased-release instructions as inapplicable to the ICAR-funded component, which the State had not undertaken to finance and had not directed the University to withhold.
Source reference: pp. 14–15Reasoning
The University’s own arrears statement identified ₹18,60,374 as due to the petitioner, and the University had sought the grant for payment of arrears to specified project employees.
Source reference: pp. 12–13CAFRI/ICAR released the funds under the pay head, expressly requiring their use for the stated purpose and within the relevant financial year.
Source reference: pp. 13–14The University’s transfer of the funds to its centralized account, non-payment to the employees, and issuance of a utilization certificate despite non-disbursement were inconsistent with those restrictions.
Source reference: pp. 13–14The State Finance Department’s instructions did not justify withholding the ICAR share; they distinguished it from the State-funded 25% component.
Source reference: pp. 14–15Holding
The Court allowed the petition, holding that the University had no lawful basis to withhold the petitioner’s admitted ICAR-funded arrears.
It directed the University to pay ₹18,60,374 with interest at 6% per annum from the due date, and to pay ₹50,000 in costs, completing payment by 9 November 2026.
Source reference: p. 16Original Court PDF
PUNAMvsCSKHPKVV PALAMPUR AND ANR
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in
