Pensionary benefits cannot be withheld indefinitely after retirement where no departmental or criminal proceedings were initiated.

Pending special audit objections cannot justify indefinite withholding of pensionary and terminal benefits after superannuation where no departmental or criminal proceedings have been initiated. The Delhi HC noted that the employee had retired more than five years earlier, the respondents gave no satisfactory explanation for the delay in concluding the audit or taking a final decision, and the relevant file had only been recovered after being misplaced. Rule 2.2(b) of the Punjab Civil Service Rules was treated as supporting the position that, in the absence of proceedings instituted during service, continued deprivation of retiral dues was unjustified. The petitioner was therefore entitled to release of the differential pension, interest, NOC, and other terminal dues.

---

---

Issues: Whether the respondents were justified in withholding the petitioner's pensionary benefits and other terminal dues on the basis of a pending special audit, and whether Rule 2.2(b) of the Punjab Civil Service Rules barred such continued withholding in the absence of any departmental or criminal proceedings after superannuation.

Analysis: The petitioner had superannuated more than five years earlier, yet no departmental or criminal proceedings had been initiated against him. The respondents relied on objections in a special audit report and stated that the relevant file had been misplaced and recovered later, but no satisfactory explanation was given for the prolonged failure to conclude the audit exercise or reach a final decision. In these circumstances, continued deprivation of terminal benefits and pension was held to be unjustified. Rule 2.2(b) was noticed as governing departmental proceedings not instituted during service, reinforcing that the petitioner could not be left indefinitely awaiting action that had not been taken.

Conclusion: The withholding of the petitioner's pensionary and terminal benefits was held to be unjustified, and the petitioner was entitled to release of the differential pension amount, interest, NOC, and other terminal dues.

---