- (1.) Concisely, the facts, culminating in the commencement, relevant for disposal of the present appeal and emanating from the record is that, R.P.Yadav son of Late Bihari Lal-respondent-plaintiff(for brevity "the plaintiff") joined as a Fisheries Officer in Fisheries Department of the State of Haryana, on 01.04.1974. Subsequently, he was promoted as District Fisheries Officer in the year 1990. Having served as District Fisheries Officer-cum-Chief Executive Officer, Gurgaon, he retired from service on 31.05.2009, after attaining the age of superannuation. His entire retiral benefits were not released within a reasonable period in the garb of some vigilance departmental enquiry against him. The plaintiff claimed that although a vigilance enquiry was initiated against him, but during the course of investigation, he was found totally innocent. He was not challaned and his name was placed in column No.2 of innocent persons of the final police report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. The plaintiff has challenged the action of the defendants, for not releasing his retiral benefits in time.
(2.) Levelling a variety of allegations and narrating the sequence of events, in all, the plaintiff claimed that the defendants have intentionally withheld his pensionary benefits, without any legal right. On the basis of aforesaid allegations, the plaintiff filed the suit for a decree of declaration and mandatory injunction, directing The Chief Secretary to Govt. of Haryana and other officersappellant-defendants(for short "the defendants"), to release his entire retiral benefits along with interest @ 18% per annum, in the manner indicated hereinabove.
(3.) The defendants contested the suit and filed the written statement, admitting the employment, period of service and date of retirement of the plaintiff. According to the defendants that, he was thrice charge-sheeted under Rule 7 of the Civil Services(Punishment & Appeal) Rules, 1987, for irregularities/misconduct committed by him and and two increments (one each for two enquiries) without cumulative effect were stopped vide Haryana Govt. orders dated 27.06.1997 and 06.01.2009 and a warning was also issued to him in respect of third enquiry by way of order dated 02.04.2009. The defendants claimed that the payment in lieu of leave encashment, GIS and GPF has already been released to the plaintiff. However, the amount of pension, commuted pension and gratuity was withheld for want of clearance certificate from the Vigilance Department. The defendants further claimed that the moment, vigilance clearance certificate was received, thereafter, remaining retiral benefits were paid to him. It will not be out of place to mention here that the defendants have stoutly denied all other allegations contained in the plaint and prayed for dismissal of the suit.;