IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.9738 of 2005 SAJDA ALAM Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 7. 23.4.2010. Mr. B.P. Pandey, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Binay Kumar, learned Assisting Counsel to the G.P.5 for the State and Mr. L.P.K. Rajgrihar, representing the Accountant General, Bihar are present. The original petitioner had superannuated from the post of Chief Engineer with effect from 30.11.1984 and filed the present writ petition after almost 21 years seeking, inter alia, a direction to the respondents for payment of the gratuity, leave encashment, G.P.F amount(s) and also for payment of the interest at the rate of 12% per annum. An explanation for the delay has been set out in paragraph-6 of this writ petition in approaching this Court stating therein about the deteriorating mental condition of the original petitioner. It is stated that the wife of the petitioner had approached the department concerned for processing the pension papers for payment of the post retiral benefits, but the same was not responded to. A formal application for payment of post retiral dues was filed by the petitioner on 31.7.2003 as is - 2 - apparent from paragraph-4 of the counter affidavit filed on behalf of respondent nos.1 and 2. Admitted position is that since after the filing of the pension papers by the original petitioner, the same was processed and the petitioner received the payment towards his pension on 16.3.2004, gratuity amount on 7.1.2005, leave encashment amount on 16.3.2004 and the group insurance amount on 11.10.2003. Learned counsel, however, submits that the provident fund amount for the period 1975-76 to June, 1981 has not yet been paid to the petitioner and which should be paid together with up to date admissible interest. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondents and in which it is stated that no sooner the petitioner deposited his pension form on 31.7.2003 that is after a lapse of 19 years of his retirement, the same was processed and the payments were made much prior to the filing of the writ petition in question which was filed only on 9.8.2005. it is thus submitted that as there was laches on part of the petitioner himself in filing the pension form and that in terms of the rule 189 of the Bihar Pension Rule, every employee is - 3 - required to file the pension papers 18 months prior to his retirement, no fault can be found on the part of the respondents in the matter of delayed payment of the post retiral dues to the petitioner. In so far as the provident fund amount is concerned, a second supplementary counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the Assistant Commissioner, Directorate of Provident Fund, Bihar, Patna in the light of the direction issued by this Court on the previous date. It has been stated that the provident fund amount of the petitioner for the period 1975-76 to June 1981 has been delayed by reason of non-availability of the deduction and withdrawal statements duly certified by Drawing and Disbursing Officer that once the said statement is made available, the claim of the petitioner with up to date statutory interest would be settled by the answering respondents. An attempt has been made to explain that steps were being taken for making payment of the pending amounts of provident fund of the original petitioner, who expired during the pendency of the proceedings and has been substituted by his wife Sajda Alam by order dated 17.5.2007 who is pursuing the proceedings thereafter. - 4 - Mr. Pandey, representing the petitioner, centered his argument primarily on the issue of payment of interest/penal interest on grounds of unexplained delay in the disbursement of the admitted amount of the post retiral benefits. It is submitted that even if the required pension papers were submitted belatedly, it did not prohibit the department concerned from processing the claim of the petitioner to the extent of 90% and which should have been paid to him in normal course. He submits that the respondents can not withhold the claims of the petitioner under the cover of the provisions of Rule 189 of the Bihar Pension Rules. Having regard to the submissions advanced on behalf of the respondents, I do find that there was considerable delay on the part of the petitioner in approaching this Court by way of writ petition which has admittedly been filed after almost the entire grievance of the deceased employee has been redressed at the hands of the respondent authorities, except the amount of GPF and which yet remains pending. Thus, taking into consideration the submissions advanced on behalf of the petitioner on the issue of interest/penal interest on the dues, in - 5 - terms of the circulars of the State Government as also the statements made in the counter affidavit, I am of the opinion that this writ petition may be disposed of in the following terms: (a) The respondent no.3 the Director, Provident Fund Directorate, Govt. of Bihar, Pant Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna shall ensure the payment of the remaining provident fund amount of the deceased employee relating to the period 1975-76 up to June, 1981 within a period of three months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order together with up to date statutory interest calculated up to the date of payment. (b) In so far as the interest on pension and gratuity is concerned, I am of the opinion that undoubtedly, the provision of rule 189 of the Bihar Pension Rules requires the employee to submit his pension form 18 months in advance and in this case the same was deposited only on 31.7.2003 meaning thereby that there was delay of almost 19 years in depositing the pension papers. In that view of the matter, I deem it fit to hold that the petitioner would entitled for payment of statutory interest at the rate of 5% on pension - 6 - and gratuity amounts from the date of submission of his pension forms until the date of payment of the pension and gratuity. The petitioner would also be entitled to interest on belated payment of the leave encashment at the rate of 5% and that would be calculated from the date of superannuation of the petitioner on 30.11.1984 until its actual payment for the reasons that it represents the salary. With the aforesaid direction(s), the writ petition is disposed of. (Jyoti Saran,J.) ahk