IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C. REV. No.117 of 2008 DR.(SMT.) HANSA SARAF wife of Dr. Justice G.C. Bharuka, previously residing at Boring Road in the town of Patna, P.S.- Shri Krishna Puri, District- Patna but presently residing at 84, Lodhi Estate, New Delhi – 110003 and permanent resident of 34, Supreme Enclave, Mayur Vihar, Phase-I, Delhi- 110091 ------ Petitioner Versus 1. MAGADH UNIVERSITY, through the Registrar, Bodh Gaya having his office at Bodh Gaya, District- Gaya. 2. The Vice-Chancellor, Magadh University, Bodh Gaya having his office at Bodh Gaya, District- Gaya. 3. Principal, Sri Arvind Mahila College, Kadam Kuan, Patna. 4. State of Bihar, through its Secretary, Department of Education, Secretariat, Patna. 5. Ranchi University through its Registrar having it’s office at Ranchi, District- Ranchi (Jharkhand) ------ Respondents. ----------- 13 5.3.2009 An odd stand has been taken on behalf of the University on the basis of the fact that the State Government as well as the Auditor General has taken an objection with respect to delayed payment of interest on the Provident Fund amount. Apparently only part salary was paid to the petitioner and, therefore, only part of the Provident Fund was deducted from the salary. The Provident Fund was not deposited in the Bank and the petitioner could not therefore, get any interest on the Provident Fund amount. The question is that the payment of salary has been made after a delay which is not the fault of the petitioner and the fact that the petitioner could not get the benefit of interest because of the delayed payment and deduction of his Provident Fund 2 also cannot be said to be the fault of the petitioner. If at all any lapses are there, they can squarely be placed on the shoulders of the State Government who ought to have paid the entire salary of the petitioner and persons like him within time so that they could actually get the benefit to which they are otherwise entitled. In the circumstances, it would be unfair and unjust that the petitioner should be paid half of his Provident Fund along with interest and the rest amount of the Provident Fund would be paid without any interest. As such this Court orders that the State should also release and allow the University to pay interest on the delayed payment of Provident Fund. The payment should be made as expeditiously as possible and preferably within a period of one month from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. This application is thus disposed of. Sanjay (Sheema Ali Khan, J.)