P&H High Court Directs Haryana to Decide Pension and Service Benefits Under New Litigation Policy

Case Name: Mahesh Kumar vs. State of Haryana and Others
Date of Judgment: 14 November 2025
Citation: CWP-10654-2016
Bench: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Harpreet Singh Brar

Held: The Punjab and Haryana High Court directed that the petitioner’s claim regarding pensionary benefits, delayed GPF release, interest entitlement and inclusion of daily-wage service toward qualifying pension period must be considered under the Haryana State Litigation Policy, 2025. The Court observed that the purpose of the newly implemented policy is to establish a fair, efficient and accountable employee grievance redressal system and reduce unnecessary litigation. The Court held that the Employees’ Grievance Redressal Committee constituted under the policy must treat the writ petition as a comprehensive representation and adjudicate the claims in a time-bound manner, with a reasoned and speaking order.

Summary: The petitioner, a retired government employee, filed the writ petition seeking quashing of the authorities’ failure to release pension, calculate qualifying service including daily-wage engagement, grant increment after passing the Fire Fighting Course, and pay interest at 18% on delayed GPF disbursement. The petitioner retired on 31 October 2015; while gratuity and leave encashment were released timely, the remaining retiral dues including provident fund and pensionary contributions were released late. The petitioner argued that the delay entitled him to statutory and judicially recognized interest, relying on decisions such as A.S. Randhawa v. State of Punjab (1998) and Harbans Lal v. State of Punjab (2012). He further contended that similarly placed employees were granted increment and service benefits while he was discriminated against. The State counsel, did not oppose consideration of the matter under the Haryana State Litigation Policy, 2025.

Decision: The Court acknowledged that the Haryana State Litigation Policy, 2025 was enacted to reduce repetitive litigation and provide structured grievance handling, including through a designated Employees’ Grievance Redressal Committee. Relying on its earlier ruling in H.C. Sharma vs. State of Haryana (CWP-2457-2025), the Court disposed of the writ petition by directing the committee to consider the petitioner’s claims comprehensively. The Court ordered completion of the exercise within three months of receipt of the certified copy of the order and clarified that if entitlement is found, relief must be granted without delay. Pending miscellaneous applications were also disposed of.