Latest news with #PunjabCivilServicesRules
Indian Express
3 days ago
- Indian Express
HC slaps Rs 1 lakh fine on Punjab for charge-sheeting retd engineer: ‘avoidable' litigation, wasted court time
Slapping a penalty of Rs 1 lakh on the Punjab government for pursuing what it called 'avoidable' and 'legally untenable' litigation that wasted court's time, the Punjab and Haryana High Court quashed disciplinary proceedings against a former executive engineer by the state Public Works Department (B&R) four years after retirement. A single bench of Chief Justice Sheel Nagu held that the charge-sheet issued by the Principal Secretary, PWD (B&R), on July 9, 2021, was 'wholly barred' by Rule 2.2(b) of the Punjab Civil Services Rules, Volume II. 'The impugned charge-sheet cannot survive the test of law and has to be quashed on anvil of Rule 2.2(b),' the court said, pointing out that the alleged lapses dated back to 2008–2010, more than 11 years before the issuance of the notice and well beyond the permissible four-year limit for post-retirement proceedings. Chief Justice Nagu strongly criticised the Punjab government for forcing retired executive engineer Paramjit Singh to litigate to vindicate his rights. 'The precious time of this Court has been wasted in adjudicating this avoidable piece of litigation, which the petitioner was compelled to initiate due to cause given by the respondents in blatant violation of law,' Justice Nagu observed. 24 years of service, charge-sheet after retirement Appearing for the retired officer, Advocate Sarthak Gupta said Paramjit joined the Punjab PWD (B&R) as sub divisional engineer in July 1993 and rose to the post of executive engineer in January 2008. He retired on December 31, 2017, after 24 years of what he described as unblemished service. Four years later, the 2021 charge-sheet accused him of multiple lapses in handling land acquisition cases during his tenure as executive engineer in Construction Division No. 1, Ferozepur. The allegations stemmed from a long-standing dispute over land in village Mohan Ke Uttar, Ferozepur. Paramjit was accused of submitting an incorrect report, failing to verify revenue records, and recommending re-acquisition of land without due diligence, allegedly causing a loss of Rs 1.83 crore to the state. The case arose from a civil suit filed in 2000 by one Gurmit Singh, decreed in 2006, which directed compensation or the return of possession. Appeals by the department were dismissed in 2007. Advocate Gupta contended that Paramjit had acted in good faith and with due diligence, repeatedly seeking records from the Land Acquisition Officer, Jalandhar, the Deputy Commissioner, Ferozepur, and other authorities. Some of these records, the lawyer claimed, dated back to 1965 and were missing or not made available until 2020. Based on the Jamabandis (land records) available at the time, Paramjit recommended acquiring Khasra No. 116, akin to Khasra No. 117, and prepared a draft notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, which was duly approved by competent authorities, his counsel contended. Advocate Gupta further contended that after Paramjit's transfer in April 2010, the acquisition process continued under his successor and higher officials. In a 2011 meeting, it was reaffirmed that Khasra No. 117 had not been acquired in 1962, prompting proceedings for the acquisition of both parcels. It was only in 2019 that official records surfaced showing the land had, in fact, been acquired in 1962 and compensation already paid, leading to recovery suits filed by the department in 2020. Terming the case 'de hors the very basic object of Litigation Policy of the State of Punjab,' the court noted that the government had filed 'an affidavit running in 56 pages opposing the claim of petitioner tooth and nail.' This conduct, Justice Nagu said, was 'nothing short of misusing the judicial process.' The court imposed a cost of Rs 1 lakh on the State, directing it to deposit the amount in the Poor Patients Fund at PGIMER, Chandigarh, and gave the government liberty to recover the sum 'from the salary of the authority issuing the impugned charge-sheet' , in this case, the Principal Secretary, PWD (B&R). Chief Justice Nagu pointed out, Rule 2.2(b) of the Punjab Civil Services Rules, Volume II, 'places a complete bar for issuance of a charge-sheet when issued after the date of superannuation in regard to any incident which took place four years before the issuance.'
Indian Express
24-05-2025
- Politics
- Indian Express
In major relief, Punjab govt notifies implementation of Old Pension Scheme for nearly 2,500 employees
In a huge relief to nearly 2,500 government employees in Punjab, the state government Friday issued a notification implementing the Old Pension Scheme (OPS) for employees whose posts were advertised or appointment letters were issued before January 1, 2004, but who had joined the service later. These employees were earlier covered under the New Pension Scheme (NPS) despite their pre-2004 recruitment process, prompting them to seek judicial intervention. The notification, dated May 23, 2025, follows a Punjab and Haryana High Court directive, bringing to a close a long legal battle fought by the affected employees. Many of them have already completed more than 20 years in service. The employees are from various departments, including the Punjab State Power Corporation Limited (PSPCL), education, local bodies, and others. According to the amended rules under the Punjab Civil Services Rules, Volume II, OPS will now apply to employees who joined after January 1, 2004, provided their posts were advertised or appointment letters were issued before that date. Employees appointed on compassionate grounds after January 1, 2004, will also be covered under OPS if the request for appointment and eligibility conditions were fulfilled before January 1, 2004. Eligible employees will be given the option to choose between OPS and the New Defined Contributory Pension Scheme (NPS). If no option is exercised within three months from the notification date, they will be deemed to have opted for NPS. Jasvir Talwara, convenor of the Purani Pension Bahali Sangharsh Committee, welcomed the decision and termed it a victory for justice. 'These employees were unfairly placed under NPS despite having fulfilled all conditions for OPS. The May 23 notification is a big win for them,' he said. Talwara added that the government must now act swiftly to comply with the high court's direction to open General Provident Fund (GPF) accounts for the 2,500 employees by May 28, 2025, so the implementation process of OPS can begin. However, he also raised concerns that around 2 lakh other employees, who joined service after January 1, 2004, continue to be excluded from OPS despite promises made by the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) before the 2022 Assembly polls. 'The government issued a notification in November 2022 promising OPS for all, but implementation has not happened. Instead, AAP ministers are now urging us to consider the Unified Pension Scheme introduced by the Centre last year, which we reject,' Talwara said. While Chief Minister Bhagwant Mann recently reiterated the implementation of OPS for employees with pre-2004 appointments, he made no mention of the larger group of post-2004 employees still awaiting relief. The OPS notification for the 2,500 employees marks a partial fulfilment of the government's commitment, but the larger demand for a complete rollback of NPS remains unresolved, said Rajat Mahajan, president of the Purani Pension Bahali Sangharsh Committee. In the first week of May, the committee members highlighted the case of Sarwan Singh who retired as a drawing teacher on July 31, 2021, under NPS. Singh now gets a pension of just Rs 4,520 per month and earns a living by setting up a burger stall in Hoshiarpur's Dasuya. It is just the tip of the iceberg, said Mahajan. The committee urged the Punjab government to remember the promises it made in 2022 before coming to power.
Hindustan Times
23-04-2025
- Hindustan Times
Ludhiana: Punjab government suspends MC official held for corruption
The Punjab government has suspended municipal corporation superintendent engineer Sanjay Kanwar, who was arrested on April 14 for allegedly demanding a commission in exchange for awarding a contract to renovate the city's Rose Garden. The suspension order, issued under Rule 4(2)(A) of the Punjab Civil Services Rules, 1970, takes immediate effect from April 16. During his suspension, Kanwar will report to the local bodies department headquarters in Chandigarh. Following his arrest, several other officials from the municipal corporation have come under Vigilance scanner. The ongoing investigation is examining the wider network involved in the alleged kickback scheme. Vigilance officers had recovered two luxury cars, cash, jewellery, and property documents from Kanwar's possession. While he has been sent to judicial custody, further inquiries are being carried out to uncover other possible beneficiaries of the tender scam.
