The Punjab and Haryana High Court on Monday directed the Punjab government and the Punjab State Power Corporation Limited (PSPCL) to grant and release all up-to-date pending installments of dearness allowance and dearness relief to all its employees and pensioners within a fortnight “at the same rates as has been paid to the members of the All India Services (IAS/IPS/IFS) serving within the state of Punjab, in accordance with the central government pattern.”The Bench also barred the state from indulging in unproductive expenditures, such as large-scale advertising campaigns, till the clearance of the dues.“Till all such dues are cleared, the State of Punjab shall not resort to any unproductive expenditures, such as large-scale advertising campaigns in print or social media, as these expenses cannot justify the denial of dues admissible to state employees,” the Bench of Acting Chief Justice Ashwani Kumar Mishra and Justice Rohit Kapoor ruled.The bench also directed the Punjab Chief Secretary to ensure scrupulous compliance of the directions and file a compliance report by way of affidavit by August 31.“In default of payment within the time aforesaid, the unpaid amounts shall carry simple interest at the rate of 6 per cent per annum from the date of expiry of the stipulated period till the date of actual realisation,” the Bench added.The controversy before the Bench was whether the state and PSPCL, after accepting and acting upon the recommendations of the 6th Punjab Pay Commission to grant DA/DR on the central government pattern, could “indefinitely withhold the release of DA/DR instalments” and stagger payment of admitted arrears through a “liquidation plan” spreading payment over five financial years, with pensioners below the age of 75 years receiving arrears in as many as 42 instalments without interest.Answering the principal issue against the appellants, the Bench held: “The State/PSPCL would be bound by its policy decision of adopting the Central Government pattern for payment of DA/DR, and cannot be permitted to pay the same in a staggered manner over a period of five financial years, by adopting a discriminatory approach and pay the amount of arrears for the pensioners below the age of 75 years, over as many as 42 instalments, and that too without interest.”Relying upon the Supreme Court’s decisions, the High Court held that once Punjab adopted the central government standard, “the benefit of the adopted standard cannot be denied.” It further observed that the government’s statement that it would “endeavour” to release DA simultaneously with the Centre qualified only the timing of release and “not the entitlement or the rate.” The Bench concluded that “the withholding of accrued instalments sine die, while AIS officers are paid at the full Central rates from the same exchequer, is violative of Article 14.”The Division Bench also upheld the Single Judge’s decision quashing the state’s liquidation plan dated February 18, 2025, under which payment of arrears had been spread over five financial years, with pensioners below 75 years required to receive dues in 42 instalments.“The liquidation plan dated February 18, 2025, which staggers the payment of the arrears uncompensated with its deferral, and is arbitrary to the extent of fixing 42 instalments selectively for certain employees, who are part of the same homogenous group, was rightly quashed, together with PSPCL’s adoptive finance circular to that extent,” the Bench added.The Bench also rejected objections raised by the state and PSPCL. Among other things, it held that the writ petitions suffered from no fatal non-joinder; PSPCL had been represented throughout and suffered no prejudice; the impugned judgment was not coram non judice.Rejecting the plea that the court had encroached upon fiscal policy, the division Bench held that “the impugned directions are a legitimate exercise of judicial review and do not trench upon fiscal policy,” adding that the state’s arguments based on comparative emoluments and financial burden were “misconceived in law”.It further held that PSPCL’s separate legal personality did not insulate it from liability, observing that its own unchallenged DA notifications supported, rather than undermined, the employees’ claim.Since the timeline fixed by the Single Judge, Justice Harpreet Singh Brar, for compliance had expired during the pendency of the appeals, the Division Bench modified only the timelines while otherwise affirming the relief granted.It directed release of all pending DA/DR within a fortnight, payment of 6 per cent simple interest in case of default, filing of a compliance affidavit by the Chief Secretary by August 31, and restraint on unproductive advertising expenditure until all dues are cleared.Concluding the matter, the Bench observed: “Resultantly, we find no merit in these appeals.”The Bench was assisted, among others, by senior advocates D.S. Patwalia, Rahul Sharma, Chanchal K. Singla, Sanjay Kaushal, Chetan Mittal, Advocate-General Maninderjit Singh Bedi, along with Senior Deputy Advocates General Salil Sabhlok and Rajeev Madan, besides other counsel.