IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR WEDNESDAY, THE 5TH AUGUST 2009 / 14TH SRAVANA 1931 WP(C).No. 8899 of 2006(H) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------------- SMT.K. LEELAM0NY, AGED 56 YEARS, W/O.REGHUNATHAN, RETIRED HSA, GOVT. HSS, KULASEKHARAPURAM, KOLLAM, RESIDING AT "RESLEE COTTAGE", ERAVIPURAM, KOLLAM. BY ADV. MR.C.UNNIKRISHNAN (KOLLAM) MR.S.HARIKRISHNAN RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, KOLLAM. 2. THE ACCOUNTANT GENERAL, KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. SUB-TREASURY OFFICER, KOLLAM. 4. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL EDUCATION, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. R1 TO R4 BY SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.T.B. REMANI. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 31/07/2009, THE COURT ON 05/08/2009 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C) NO. 8899/2006-H APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 02/07/2004 OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT IN O.P. NO. 14646/2003. EXT.P2: COPY OF THE PAY SLIP DATED 24/09/2004 OF THE LAST MONTH ISSUED BY THE ACCOUNTANT GENERAL. EXT.P3: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 07/10/2004 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE ACCOUNTANT GENERAL. EXT.P4: COPY OF THE REVISED PAY SLIP DATED 22/11/2004 AUTHORIZING THE CORRECT PAY IN COMPLIANCE WITH EXT.P1 JUDGMENT. EXT.P5: COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 13/12/2004 FOR PENSION ALONG WITH ALL NECESSRY DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED ON 16/12/2004 TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P6: COPY OF THE LETTER NO.D2/31/379/04 DATED 15/02/2005 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT FORWARDING THE PENSION PROPOSAL OF THE PETITIONER. EXT.P7: COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 24/03/2005 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT REQUESTING TO FORWARD THE SERVICE BOOK OF THE PETITIONER. EXT.P8: COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS NO.P-16/PEN A/293/BX/05-06 DATED 08/08/2005 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT ADMITTING PENSIONARY BENEFITS OF THE PETITIONER. EXT.P9: COPIES OF THE NON-LIABILITY CERTIFICATES OBTAINED BY THE PETITIONER FROM GHSS, VALATHUNGAL & KULASEKHARAPURAM ALONG WITH THE COVERING LETTER DATED 23/11/2005. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE rs. T.R. Ramachandran Nair, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C) No. 8899 of 2006-H - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 5th day of August, 2009. JUDGMENT This writ petition is filed by the petitioner seeking to grant interest at the rate of 12% for the delay caused in disbursing the Death-cum- Retirement Benefits. The petitioner retired from service on 30.6.2004 as High School Assistant. There was a dispute regarding the pay fixation which was finalised as per Ext.P1 judgment dated 2.7.2004, whereby a direction was issued to reckon the entire period of provisional service for pensionary benefits. Thereafter, Ext.P2 pay slip was issued whereby her pay was fixed at Rs.8,850/-, whereas the petitioner was entitled for pay at Rs.8,950/-. On 7.10.2004 the petitioner submitted Ext.P3 representation before the Accountant General to correct the same and thereafter Ext.P4 dated 22.11.2004, a revised pay slip was issued. Thereafter, the petitioner, on 16.12.2004, submitted before the first respondent the pension application along with necessary documents. 2. The petitioner is claiming interest on the ground of delay in respect of three different spells, on the part of the first respondent. The pension papers were forwarded only by 15.2.2005, as per Ext.P5. Thus wpc 88992006 2 purposeful delay of two months was caused, according to the petitioner. The Service Book was forwarded only on 21.7.2005, i.e. after four months of communication by the Accountant General vide Ext.P7 letter dated 24.3.2005. This is the second period. Ext.P8 is the order by which pensionary benefits were admitted and the same is dated 8.8.2005. Finally, the non liability certificate was forwarded only in January, 2006. Thus, there is purposeful delay caused by the first respondent. It is on these allegations, the petitioner seeks for payment of interest. 3. A detailed counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the first respondent and the petitioner has filed a reply affidavit also. It is pointed out by the first respondent in the counter affidavit that the petitioner's pension proposal was submitted on 16.12.2004, i.e. six months after the date of retirement. Before forwarding the pension papers, pension sanctioning authority had to verify the pension proposal and make necessary entires in the Service Book regarding the pay and allowances. The Service Book was at the office of the Accountant General for verification of audit objection for the period in which the petitioner had worked as H.S.A. But by considering her's as a special case, the pension proposal was submitted to the Accountant General without the Service Book, by letter dated 15.2.2005. The administrative delay occurred from wpc 88992006 3 16.12.2004, i.e. the date of receipt of pension proposal, to 15.2.2005 is due to the non availability of Service Book and connected documents in the office of the first respondent. 4. Thereafter, the Service Book was returned by the Accountant General's office by communication dated 23.2.2005 which was received in the office of the first respondent on 4.3.2005 with direction to rectify the remarks as per the audit objection. The same was forwarded to the Headmaster, Govt. High School for Boys, Valathungal for rectifying the remarks and after making necessary entries as per the directions of the Accountant General, the Headmaster returned the Service Book to the office of the first respondent on 26.4.2005. After verification of the Service Book, it was forwarded to the Accountant General vide letter dated 18.5.2005. It is therefore explained that there was no purposeful delay in forwarding the Service Book. Regarding the delay in issuing the non liability certificate, it is explained that it could have been issued only after obtaining NLC/LC from the Headmasters of Govt. H.S.S., Kulasekharapuram and Govt. H.S. for Boys, Valathungal. These were collected by the petitioner and submitted to the office of the first respondent on 24.11.2005 without the covering letter of the concerned Headmasters. The NLC had not been filled up properly in the prescribed form. Again, it was returned to the wpc 88992006 4 school on 6.12.2005 with a direction to resubmit the same. Final consolidated NLC was received on 31.12.2005 and thereafter it was forwarded on 25.1.2006. It is therefore submitted that there is no purposeful delay in the matter. 5. In the reply affidavit, the petitioner has reiterated her contentions in the writ petition. The petitioner submits that the first respondent took 10 days time for forwarding the Service Book to the subordinate, which is deliberately made. It is also stated that no priority was given to the petitioner's case. Regarding the issue of NLC, it is pointed out that there is a delay of more than 25 days. There is a delay of 50 days in forwarding the Service Book. 6. The question is whether there is any culpable delay in processing the pension papers by the office of the first respondent. It is clear from the pleadings that the petitioner's pension application was submitted only on 16.12.2004, i.e. six months after the retirement. At that point of time, the Service Book was with the Accountant General's office. Even though the petitioner contends that there is culpable delay in the matter, going by the averments in the counter affidavit, it is seen that the Service Book was required for making necessary entries and the office of the first respondent ultimately forwarded the papers without the Service Book on 15.2.2005. wpc 88992006 5 Therefore, the delay from 16.12.2004 to 15.2.2005 is only because of the non-availability of Service Book and connected documents. It cannot be disputed that in spite of submission of the Service Book, the office of the Accountant General wanted certain endorsements to be made by the Headmaster and therefore time was taken for that also. It cannot be said that there is unreasonable delay in returning the Service Book to the Accountant General's office after obtaining the same from the Headmaster. 7. The issuance of NLC also should be considered in the light of the fact that even though the petitioner had collected the same from the two schools and submitted on 24.11.2005, there were defects which were found out only on verification. Even if it is the case of the petitioner that there is culpable delay thereafter upto 25.1.2006, the same has been explained in para 6 of the counter affidavit. The explanation is plausible. 8. It cannot be disputed that the first respondent had to take various steps in the matter and the office of the first respondent had been following up the matter also. Only if there is culpable delay due to inaction or the like, a liability to compensate the petitioner by paying interest can arise. On the admitted pleadings, such a conclusion cannot be arrived at. The administrative delay occurred in the matter, has been explained properly and the explanation is a plausible one also. The petitioner's case that delay wpc 88992006 6 has been caused deliberately, is not supported by any material also. Therefore, the writ petition fails and the same is dismissed. (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) kav/