IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.15192 of 2008 Shubdhi Devi, Wife of Late Ramadhar Rai, Resident of Village Balua, P.O. Raini, P.S. Sakara, District Muzaffarpur. -------- Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Bihar. 2. The Chief Engineer, Tube Well, Bihar, Patna. 3. The Superintending Engineer, Tube Well Circle, Pusa, District Samastipur. 4. The Executive Engineer, Tube Well Division, Pusa, District Samastipur. 5. The Provident Fund Officer, Samastipur. 6. The Accountant General, Bihar, Patna. ------------ Respondents ----------- 2 04.05.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and counsel for the State. The prayer of the petitioner in this writ petition reads as follows:- “(I) For issuance of an appropriate writ in the nature of MANDAMUS, commanding and directing the Respondent Authorities to revise the pension of the husband of the petitioner and after death of her husband revised the family pension of the petitioner in view of the Finance Department Resolution No. 11558 dated 22.12.1999, after granting Notional pay-scale with effect from 01.01.1996 and pay the differences of arrears of pension and family pension with Statutory as well as penal interest. (II) For issuance of an appropriate writ in the nature of MANDAMUS, commanding and directing the 2 Respondent Authorities to prove the calculation chart of G.P.F. Account and pay the remaining amount of G.P.F. to the petitioner with statutory as well as penal interest. (III)For issuance of an appropriate writ in the nature of MANDAMUS, commanding and directing the Respondent Authorities to pay the interest over the delayed payment of Pension and gratuity for the period from 01.05.1992 to 07.03.2000 i.e. after lapse of about 8 years though the husband of the petitioner retired from his service on 30.04.1992.” Counsel for the petitioner very fairly submits that so far prayer no.I is concerned, the same no longer survives, inasmuch as, the pension of the petitioner has been revised in the upgraded pay scale. As with regard to the prayer no.II i.e. statutory interest on the amount of G.P.F., the issue stands explained by the respondent no.5 in the counter affidavit in paragraph no.8 wherein it has been categorically stated that the petitioner had filed her application for final withdrawal on 5.6.1999 and therefore, she has been paid interest from 3 June, 1999 to November, 2008. In the opinion of this Court, this should also be sufficient compliance of the provision of the G.P.F. Act and Rules, inasmuch as, a person can only claim interest from the date of submission of the application for final withdrawal. That would leave this Court to look into the third part of the grievance of the petitioner as with regard to interest for the delayed payment of pension and gratuity for a period of 1.5.1992 to 7.3.2000. In ordinary course, the circular of the Finance Department of making payment of five percent is applicable but when the entitlement of the petitioner itself had changed only on account of the subsequent revision of pay-scale, such amount would not qualify for payment of interest. That being so, none of the three reliefs prayed by the petitioner in this writ application can be now said to be subsisting and accordingly, this application, being wholly without substance, must be and is hereby dismissed. Rsh (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)