IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR THURSDAY, THE 8TH JANUARY 2009 / 18TH POUSHA 1930 WP(C).No. 15535 of 2008(Y) ----------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): -------------------------- SRI.THOMAS PHILIP, AGED 61, S/O.P.V.PHILIP, RESIDING AT PANICKASSERIL, NJAKKANAL P.O., KRISHNAPURAM - 690 533. BY ADV. SRI.PETER THARAKAN RESPONDENT(S): ----------------------------- 1. KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, VYDYUTHI BHAVANAM, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 2. THE ACCOUNTS OFFICER (PF), KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, VYDYUTHI BHAVANAM, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. ADV. SRI.K.S.ANIL, SC, KSEB FOR R1 & 2 SRI. ASOK M.CHERIYAN, SC, KSEB FOR R1 & 2 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 08/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss WPC.NO.15535/2008 Y APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: COPY OF THE LETTER ISSUED BY THE CHIEF INTERNAL AUDITOR, VYDYUTHI BHAVANAM, PATTOM,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM UNDER DTD. 30/07/2001 TO THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, ELECTRICAL DIVISION, KSEB, KATTAPPANA SEEKING CERTAIN CLARIFICATION WITH REGARD TO THE APPLICATION OF CLOSURE OF GPF ACCOUNT NO.18597 IN THE NAME OF THE PETITIONER. EXT.P2: LETTER DTD. 30/04/2002 ISSUED BY THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER ELECTRICAL DIVISION KSEB, KATTAPPANA. EXT.P3: LETTER DTD. 06/05/1994 ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, ELECTRICAL DIVISION, PATTOM REGARDING NON-CREDITING OF THE AMOUNTS DEDUCTED TO THE PF ACCOUNT AT THE APPROPRIATE TIME. EXT.P4: LETTER DTD. 29/05/2001 ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE ACCOUNTS OFFICER PF SECTION KSEB VYDYUTHI BHAVANAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. EXT.P5: LETTER DTD. 04/07/03 ISSUED BY ACCOUNTS OFFICER (PF) TO THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, ELECTRICAL DIVISION, K.S.E.BOARD, KATTAPPANA TO OBTAIN A FRESH APPLICATION FROM THE PETITIONER. EXT.P6: THE AUTHORIZATION LETTER DTD. 03/12/2004 ISSUED BY ACCOUNTS OFFICER. EXT.P7: LETTER DT. 03/03/05 ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE CHIEF ACCOUNTS OFFICER PF SECTION KSEB, VYDYUTHY BHAVANAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM REQUESTING TO GRANT INTEREST FOR THE PERIOD FROM 31/05/02 TO 14/02/05. EXT.P8: LETTER DTD. 07/03/05 ISSUED BY ACCOUNTS OFFICER (PF) TO THE PETITIONER. EXT.P9: LETTER DTD. 25/05/05 ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE ACCOUNTS OFFICER (PF) K.S.E.B. EXT.P10: LEGAL NOTICE DTD. 03/06/2006 ISSUED TO THE ACCOUNTS OFFICER GPF, KSEB, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM ISSUED BY ADV.ANILKUMAR K.N.PILLAI. EXT.P11: REPLY LETTER DTD. 08/06/06 ISSUED BY THE ACCOUNTS OFFICER (GPF) TO ADV. ANILKUMAR K.N.PILLAI. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: N I L /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE Kss T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J -------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) NO: 15535 of 2008 --------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 8th day of January, 2009 JUDGMENT The main relief sought by the writ petitioner is for a direction to the second respondent to grant interest for the period from 31-05-2002 to 03-11-2004 on the amounts which were lying in the Provident Fund account of the petitioner. 2. The petitioner retired from service from the Kerala State Electricity Board on 31-05-2001 while working as Assistant Executive Engineer in the Electrical Division Kattappana, Idukki District. According to the petitioner, at the time of his retirement, he submitted an application for closure of his provident fund account in form E. Thereafter, the Chief Internal Auditor issued a letter to the Executive Engineer seeking clarification with regard to the application of closure of Provident Fund No. in the name of petitioner as per Ext.P1. While continuing in service, the petitioner had duly informed the Executive Engineer regarding the non crediting of the amounts deducted to the PF account. The copies of these letters are evidenced by Exts.P3 and P4. The payments were effected on 14.2.2005 being the amount deposited with interest calculated up to 31-5-2002. 3. The petitioner submitted Ext.P7 representation to the Chief Accounts Officer requesting to grant him interest for the period from 31.5.2002 to 14.2.2005 which was declined by Ext.P8. Even though wpc:15535 of 2008 2 Exts.P9 and P10 were submitted to the respondents by Ext.P11 again the demand was rejected. 4. Respondents have filed a counter affidavit. The relevant rule concerned with the payment of interest is Rule 15(4) of the General Provident (Kerala Rules). According to the said rule the interest shall be paid on the balance amount outstanding at the credit up to the end of previous month in which authorisation for payment is issued by the competent authority provided that: a)The application for closure/transfer of account is received by the competent authority within one year from the date necessitating closure. b)If application is received after the stipulated time limit, interest only up to one year from the date necessitating closure shall be admitted. 5. The stand taken by the respondents is that the petitioner submitted the application two months after his retirement on 31-5-2001. The same was defective and the details entered in the application was found incomplete. There is dispute between the petitioner and respondents as to whether credit cards were received or not. The petitioner contends that it was the responsibility of the respondents to issue credit cards and the petitioner cannot be made liable for the lapses on the part of the respondents. Respondents contended that in spite of non receipt of credit cards etc. they had verified the available records to find out the actual amount due and then payments were finally effected. wpc:15535 of 2008 3 6. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that going by Ext.P2 and other communications it will be evident that the petitioner has not received any credit cards as he was abroad for more than 15 years of his service. There is any culpable inaction on the part of the respondents in the matter. Therefore, going by the relevant rule, the petitioner was entitled the interest for one year which was granted. It cannot be said that there was any culpable delay on the part of respondents. The petitioner had submitted the application only after retirement on 13.7.2001, 2 months after his retirement. The application was defective. The petitioner was given due intimation on 30.7.2001 about it. He did not respond also. It cannot be said, in the above circumstances, that there is any violative of Rule 15(4) in the matter, in regard to the payment of interest. I do not find any reason to interfere with the proceedings issued as per Exts.P11 by which the respondents rejected the claim for further interest. The writ petition is dismissed. T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE bps