P&H: Quashes Recovery From Retiral Benefits, Says Departmental Proceedings After Retirement Were Time Barred

punjab-haryana
⚖️ Order Date: 01 Sep 2026
Headnotes

(i) Punjab Civil Services Rules, Volume II, Rule 2.2(b) — Retiral benefits — Recovery from pensionary dues — Impugned order directing recovery of ₹22,93,032 from petitioner’s retiral benefits was quashed and set aside and respondents were directed to release all retiral benefits in entirety with...

(ii) Punjab Civil Services Rules, Volume II, Rule 2.2(b) — Departmental proceedings after retirement — Bar of limitation — Initiation of disciplinary proceedings after retirement in respect of an alleged incident of 2011, when the charge-sheet was issued on 04.07.2016 after superannuation, was impermissible as...

(iii) Punjab Civil Services Rules, Volume II, Rule 2.2(b) — Pensionary proceedings — Government’s right to withhold or withdraw pension or recover pecuniary loss can be exercised only where pensioner is found guilty in departmental or judicial proceeding and proceedings satisfy the conditions in proviso....

(iv) Departmental inquiry — Second inquiry — Petitioner having been exonerated in first inquiry and findings of that inquiry never having been set aside, constitution of a second Inquiry Committee and findings recorded therein were without jurisdiction and not sustainable in law. (Para 5)


Facts of the Case

P&H: Quashes Recovery From Retiral Benefits, Says Departmental Proceedings After Retirement Were Time Barred

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has set aside an order directing recovery of ₹22,93,032 from the retiral benefits of a retired PUDA employee, holding that the disciplinary action was initiated after retirement in relation to an incident that was more than four years old.

Justice Harpreet Singh Brar was hearing a petition filed by Ranbir Singh, who retired on 29 February 2016 after serving as Senior Assistant Accounts since 1981. The petitioner argued that he had retired with a clean record, no disciplinary proceedings were pending against him at the time of superannuation, and the charge-sheet was issued only...

Login required to open full judgment PDF
Login to Access File