AMRIK SINGH vs STATE OF PUNJAB — CWP/10950/2024

Disposed: --ALLOWED on 13th May 2026.

Case disposed Next hearing 13-May-2024

CNR: PHHC010617602024

Filing Number

CWP/25115/2024

Filing Date

08-May-2024

Registration No

CWP/10950/2024

Registration Date

09-May-2024

Judge

Mr. Justice Harpreet Singh Brar

Coram

Mr. Justice Harpreet Singh Brar

Bench Type

Single

Category

20.5 - SC OSB (PUNJAB) RETIRAL BENEFITS ( 467 )

Sub-Category

( 944 )

Judicial Branch

WRITS -I BRANCH

Decision Date

13-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

--ALLOWED

Last updated 01-Jun-2026

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.AMRIK SINGH

    Adv. Rakesh Sobti

  2. 2.AMRIK SINGH

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF PUNJAB

  2. 2.AMRIK SINGH

  3. 3.DIRECTOR,LOCAL GOVT

  4. 4.MUNICIPAL COUNCIL

  5. 5.THE PRESIDENT,MC

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 13-May-2026

    Mr. Justice Harpreet Singh BrarView PDF

    Summary of CWP-10950-2024: The Punjab High Court allowed Amrik Singh's petition seeking interest on delayed retiral benefits. The court held that the Municipal Council's withholding of benefits without initiating disciplinary proceedings was unjustified, even though Singh had submitted no-objection certificates from all branches before retirement. The court directed payment of 6% per annum interest (calculated from two months after retirement until actual payment) rather than the 18% claimed, citing established precedent that delays beyond two months from the due date warrant compensation for retirees. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 08-May-2024

    Case filed

    Registration No. CWP/10950/2024

casestatus.in Summary

Summary of CWP-10950-2024: The Punjab High Court allowed Amrik Singh's petition seeking interest on delayed retiral benefits. The court held that the Municipal Council's withholding of benefits without initiating disciplinary proceedings was unjustified, even though Singh had submitted no-objection certificates from all branches before retirement. The court directed payment of 6% per annum interest (calculated from two months after retirement until actual payment) rather than the 18% claimed, citing established precedent that delays beyond two months from the due date warrant compensation for retirees. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case