IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.172 of 2006 RAM KUMAR SINGH Versus THE FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA & ORS. ----------- 07/ 18.03.2010 Heard Mr. Atul Kumar Pandey, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. Bhupendra Kumar Verma, learned counsel representing the Employees Provident Fund Organization and Mr. Prabhakar Tekriwal for the Food Corporation of India. The only issue which remained to be adjudicated in this case was whether the authorities concerned who were to process the claim of the petitioner for payment of pension had caused unreasonable delay so as to invite imposition of penal interest in terms of paragraph-17-A of the Employees Provident Fund Scheme, 1995 (hereinafter referred to as the Scheme). A perusal of the said provision shows that the imposition of penal interest is personally upon the Commissioner concerned who fails without sufficient cause to settle the claim complete in all respects within 30 days and whereupon he is liable to pay interest at the rate of 12 per cent per annum to be deducted from his salary. The petitioner had set out his claim in the light of the aforesaid provision. A supplementary counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondent nos. 6 and 7 today in the course of the 2 proceedings and the details of the movement of the file concerning the claim of the petitioner has been set out in paragraph- 4 and 5 of the affidavit. The petitioner was to draw his pension from Delhi but he exercised his option of drawing pension from the Patna office of the respondents and filed his claim form to that effect. It is stated that the claim application of the petitioner was received from the Delhi Regional Office on 3.12.2007 in the Bihar Regional Office and whereafter it was sent to the Pension Section where it was received on 18.12.2007. The Pension Section examined the claim of the petitioner and found certain deficiencies in his claim as the name of the Bank from where the petitioner had expressed his willingness to receive his pension was not covered under the Scheme under which, the disbursement arrangement was only through the Punjab National Bank or the Bank of India or the H.D.F.C. Bank. The petitioner had expressed his willingness to receive his pension through the State Bank of India, Bihar Region. In such circumstances, the claim being found defective, the matter was placed on 3.12.2007 and a letter was issued to the petitioner with a suggestion to submit a photo copy of the account number together with pass book showing opening of account in the Punjab National Bank or the Bank of India or the H.D.F.C. Bank vide letter communication dated 8.1.2008 with a reminder again on 10.4.2008. The petitioner submitted the required information only on 19.5.2008 and whereafter the 3 matters after being processed, the pension payment order was prepared on 25.6.2008 and issued. In view of the explanation set out in the supplementary counter affidavit, I do not find any unreasonable delay in processing and disbursement of the pension claim of the petitioner. In that view of the matter, no claim for interest in terms of paragraph 17A of the Scheme is made out. As the admissible dues towards pension has already been paid to the petitioner, nothing survives in the writ petition and the same is disposed of. S.Sb/- (Jyoti Saran, J.)