STTE OF PUNJAB & ANR. versus H.B. MALHOTRA

Citation: [2006] SUPP. 2 S.C.R. 391 · Decided: 12-05-2006 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: S.B. SINHA · Disposal: Dismissed

Judgment (excerpt)

ST A TE OF PUNJAB & ANR. 
v. 
H.B. MALHOTRA 
MAY 12, 2006 
[S.B. SINHA AND P.P. NAOLEKAR, JJ.] 
Service Law: 
Punjab Civil Service Rules, 1969; Rule 592: Employee-Disciplinary 
proceedings against-Employee offering to retire voluntarily on ground of 
health-Acceptance of offer by employer-Disciplinary proceedings 
dropped-Non-payment of retiral benefits-Challenge tcr-High Court 
directing the employer to release the benefits-On appeal, Held: Once 
disciplinary proceedings were dropped against the employee even if offer of 
voluntary retirement not accepted, he would be deemed to be continuing in 
service till he reaches the age of superannuation-Hence, he is entitled to 
full retiral benefits-State to pay all such benefits to him-Directions issued. 
The respondent was an employee of the State of Punjab. Disciplinary 
proceedings have been initiated against him. During the pendency of the 
proceedings, he offered to retire voluntarily from the services on 
account of his ill-health. Accepting the offer, the disciplinary proceeding 
was dropped against him by the authorities. However, his retiral 
benefits were not released. He filed a writ petition before the High 
Court. The High Court directed the authorities to release all the retiral 
benefits including pension to the respondent. A review petition filed by 
the employer-State was dismissed by the High Court. Hence the present 
appeal. 
Appellant-employer contended that the High Court has failed to 
take into consideration the fact that the respondent was not eligible to 
obtain the retiral benefits pursuant to or in furtherance of his offer of 
voluntary retirement; that the Voluntary Retirement Rules were not in 
force at the relevant time; and that the respondent did not complete the 
qualifying period of service; 
Dismissing the appeals, the CoiI'rt 
HELD : No contention was raised by the appellant before the High 
391 
A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
H 
A 
B 
392 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2006] SUPP. 2 S.C.R. 
Court in terms of the extant rules, the respondent was not entitled to 
pension and/or other retiral benefits. It has not been explained before 
the High Court or for that matter before this Court as to why no action 
was taken on the offer made by the respondent and why the disciplinary 
proceedings had been dropped. If the disciplinary proceedings as against 
the respondent were dropped and that the offer of voluntary retirement 
had not been accepted, he would be deemed to be continuing in service 
till he reached the age of superannuation; the logical consequence whereof 
could be that he would be entitled to the full retiral benefits which were 
payable to him in accordance with law. The State, therefore, will have to 
pay the retiral benefits to which the respondent was entitled to pursuant 
C 
to or in furtherance of the offer made by it before the High Court. 
D 
E 
F 
G 
Hence, in the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case, it is not 
proper to interfere with the judgment of the High Court. (396-B-C-DI 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal Nos. 5025-5026 
of 2005 
From the Final Order 2.2.2004 and 23.7.2004 of High Court of Punjab 
& Haryana at Chandigarh in C.W.P. No. 14907/2002 and R.A. No. 119/2004 
in C.W.P. No. 14907 of 2002 
Ms. Kawaljit Koohar, D. Jha, Adv., for Arun K. Sinha, Adv., for the 
Appellants 
Respondent-in-person (NP) 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
S.B. SINHA, J. : The State of Punjab is before us being aggrieved by 
and dissatisfied with the judgment and order dated 2.2.2004 passed in C. W.P. 
No.14907/200:2. as also the order dated 23.7.2004 passed in R.A.No.119/ 
2004 in C.W.P. No.14907/2002, whereby and whereunder it refused to 
review the said orders. 
The basic fact of the matter is not in dispute. 
The respondent herein was an employee of the State of Punjab. A 
disciplinary proceedings is said to have been initiated against him. During 
the pendency of the said proceedings he expressed his intention to retire 
H 
voluntarily from the services on account of his health problems. Accepting 
STATE v. H.B. MALHOTRA [SINHA, J.] 
393 
the said offer, the said disciplinary proceeding was dropped. The respondent, 
however, was not paid his retiral benefits. He filed a writ petition before the 
Punjab and Haryana High Court which was marked as C.W.P. No.14907/ 
2002. The High Court on 24.7.2003, passed the following order: 
"Mr. Karan Singh, Director, Public Relations, Government of 
Punjab is present in Court. He h

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.