In a ruling with wide implications for government and municipal retirees, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has held that the primary responsibility to ensure full payment of retiral benefits rests on the last employer, and employees cannot be made to suffer due to internal delays, contribution disputes, or administrative lapses between departments.Deciding a bunch of connected writ petitions filed against State of Punjab, Justice Harpreet Singh Brar directed the release of pending retiral dues—including revised pension, gratuity, leave encashment and arrears—with interest at 6 per cent per annum, while making it clear that delays beyond two months from retirement would automatically attract interest liability.Fixing accountability, Justice Brar ruled, “The primary responsibility rests upon the last employer to effectively pursue and coordinate the matter with the previous employers and any lapse in this regard cannot be used to the detriment of the employee.”The Court made it clear that the issues between departments could not be cited to deny or delay dues to a retired employee.Taking a firm view of the delay, Justice Brar reiterated the settled legal position that “retiral benefits are not a bounty but a vested right of the employees.”Relying on the Full Bench judgment in the case of A.S. Randhawa versus State of Punjab, the Court further made it clear that any delay beyond a reasonable period—quantified as two months—ipso facto entailed liability to pay interest.The Bench during the course of hearing was told that the petitioners had served on Class III and IV posts in different Municipal Bodies and retired between March 2016 and May 2021 from Municipal Corporation, Abohar. They approached the Court seeking revised pension under the 6th Pay Commission, enhanced gratuity, leave encashment, arrears and interest at 18 per cent. Despite the Punjab Government’s circular dated October 29, 2021, implementing 6th Pay Commission benefits for employees retiring on or after January 1, .2016, approval dated December 22, 2022, for disbursement of enhanced gratuity, and clarification dated March 7, 2023, extending benefits even to those retiring prior to notification, the benefits were either not released or were released without interest despite considerable delay.The respondents attributed the delay to procedural formalities and administrative exigencies. Rejecting this stand, Justice Brar held, “The explanation cannot be accepted as a valid justification for withholding retiral benefits.”The Court found that the entitlement of the petitioners was not in dispute, the issuance of relevant instructions had not been denied, and no cogent material had been placed on record to justify the delay or denial of interest. In some cases, retiral benefits had not been paid at all, and the authorities were unable to furnish any timeline, which the Court said reflected lack of diligence and administrative apathy.Disposing of the petitions, the Court directed the respondents to release all retiral dues, including revised pension, gratuity, leave encashment and arrears, along with interest at 6 per cent per annum, to be calculated after the expiry of two months from the date of retirement till actual payment.The ruling makes it clear that the burden of ensuring timely payment lies on the last employer, and any failure in coordination between departments cannot be used to deprive a retiree of lawful dues.