No Reassessment of Departmental Inquiries by Courts, Orders Interest on Delayed GPF Payments: P&H High Court

High Court of Punjab and Haryana ruled in Ram Chander vs. State of Haryana and Others. The court upheld the recovery penalties imposed on Ram Chander, a retired Sub-Divisional Officer (SDO), but directed that he be paid interest for the delayed release of his General Provident Fund (GPF) payments, citing unjustified delays by the state.

The petitioner, Ram Chander, had served as a Junior Engineer and was later promoted to SDO before retiring on May 31, 1997. Following his retirement, two separate disciplinary proceedings resulted in recovery orders of Rs. 3,174 and Rs. 25,850 being imposed for negligence during his service. Additionally, his GPF payments were delayed, leading him to file for interest on the delayed amounts.

Court Upholds Recovery Penalties and Defines Scope of Judicial Review
Justice Namit Kumar emphasized that the High Court's role in reviewing departmental disciplinary proceedings is limited. Referring to precedents from the Supreme Court, it was reiterated that High Courts cannot act as appellate authorities over disciplinary inquiries unless there is a violation of natural justice or procedural laws. The court stated, "The High Court is not constituted in a proceeding under Article 226 a court of appeal over the decision of the authorities holding a departmental inquiry against a public servant".

Since the departmental inquiries were found to have followed the Haryana Civil Services (Punishment and Appeal) Rules, 1987, the court upheld the recovery orders. The petitioner’s claims that the penalties were unjust were dismissed as the inquiry had been properly conducted.

However, the court ruled in favor of Ram Chander regarding his GPF payments, which had been delayed in three installments over several years. Despite partial interest payments by the state, the court found the delays were not attributable to the petitioner and directed the state to pay interest for the entire period of delay until the final settlement. Citing the A.S. Randhawa case, Justice Kumar ordered, "The respondents are directed to grant applicable rate of interest on the GPF Payment(s) w.e.f. 01.06.1997 till the actual date of payment".

The court dismissed Ram Chander’s petitions against the recovery penalties but provided relief by ordering interest on his delayed GPF payments, reinforcing the principle that state departments must compensate for undue delays in disbursing retirement benefits.

Date of Decision: September 24, 2024