IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.2630 of 2006 DR.NARESH PRASAD Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 02/ 26.03.2010 Heard Mr. L.P.K. Rajgrihar for the petitioner, Ms. Nividita Nirvikar, G.P. 16 for the State and Mr. J.P. Karn, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Accountant General. The petitioner took voluntary retirement while holding the post of Medical Officer at Primary Health Centre (Family Planning Unit), Sadar Block, Darbhanga, with effect from 31.7.2003. It is contended that the petitioner soon after seeking voluntary retirement applied for payment of his retiral dues including provident fund, leave encashment and other dues but the same was not paid to him resulting in filing of the writ petition in question. Admitted position is that the entire post retiral dues found admissible to the petitioner has since been paid to him during the pendency of the proceedings. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that yet his relief placed at paragraph-1(ii) stands. He submits that although he took the voluntary retirement with effect from 31.7.2003 and the payments of provident fund was made in August, 2006 but the interest has only been calculated for six months since after his voluntary retirement i.e. until January, 2004. He thus submits that there being no laches on the part of the petitioner in submission of the claim petition for payment of the provident fund amount, he is entitled for statutory interest for - 2 - the period February, 2004 until the date of payment. Learned counsel for the State, with reference to the three affidavits filed in course of the proceedings by the District Provident Fund Officer, Vaishali, Muzaffarpur and Darbhanga respectively, submits that no doubt some delay has taken place in the processing of the claim of the petitioner but it is not a case where the department was sitting over the matter rather the deductions was being collected and thereafter payments have been made resulting in some time. She thus submits that it is not one of the cases in which interest may be awarded. Learned counsel for the petitioner opposing the contentions submits that so long as the delay has taken place the petitioner is liable for payment of statutory interest. Having regard to the rival contentions of the parties, I am of the opinion that the petitioner is entitled for statutory interest for the delayed period. The District Provident Fund Officer, Darbhanga shall re-calculate the interest for the entire period i.e. the date of voluntary retirement until the date the payments were made and make payment of the same after adjusting the interest already paid, within a period of three months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. The writ petition stands disposed of. S.Sb/- (Jyoti Saran, J.)