IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.1927 of 2006 BACHANI DEVI Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 02/ 15.02.2010 Heard Mr. Pramod Mishra for the petitioner and Mr. Deepak Kumar, learned assisting counsel to G.P. 16 and learned counsel for the Accountant General. The petitioner who is the widow of Late Shardanand Khan has filed the writ petition for payment of G.P.F. amount as admissible to her Late husband together with upto date interest. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that though the husband of the petitioner superannuated as Basic Health Worker at Kumarkhand in the Madhepura district with effect from 31.7.1995 and subsequently expired on 4.5.1998 but the said G.P.F. amount was not paid to him during his life time nor has been given to the present petitioner. In that view of the matter, it is submitted that the petitioner is not only entitled to the principal amount but also to the interest calculated from the date of superannuation of her Late husband until the actual payment is made to the present petitioner. Learned counsel for the State, with reference to a letter dated 1.3.2006 of the In-Charge, Medical Officer, Primary Health Centre, Kumarkhand addressed to the Civil Surgeon- cum-Chief Medical Officer, Madhepura, submits that the entire payment of the post retiral benefits of the Late husband of the petitioner had been carried out in May, 1996 itself but since the 2 husband of the petitioner never filled up the withdrawal form, hence the amount towards G.P.F. could not be made over to him. In the said letter it is also mentioned that letter bearing no. 142 dated 28.4.2004 had been sent at the residential address of the deceased employee for filling up the withdrawal form but despite the said position neither any claim came forward nor any documents were presented. Learned counsel thus submits that it is in this background that the amounts remain pending. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that not only the employee expired waiting for the payment but even the present petitioner had filed representations for the said payment but has not received the same. Copies of the representations have been placed at Annexure-1/1 of the writ petition. Be that as it may, the fact as it emanates from the letter of the In-Charge, Medical Officer is that the final withdrawal form for payment of the G.P.F. amount does not appear to have been submitted by the husband of the petitioner. The writ petitioner also does not appear to have taken any steps for filling up the same. In the said circumstances, the respondents cannot be held responsible for the delay in payment especially in circumstances that for almost three years the deceased employee took no steps to submit the claim form and even his dependents have not taken sufficient steps for filling up the same for withdrawal of G.P.F. However, having regard to the circumstances that the 3 matter has been lingering for almost 15 years, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to present herself before the respondent no. 7, In-Charge, Medical Officer, Kumarkhand who would ensure that the withdrawal form is properly filled up by the petitioner and whereafter the same would be forwarded to the respondent no. 5, the District Provident Fund Officer, Madhepura for taking expeditious steps towards payment of the G.P.F. amount of the deceased employee to the petitioner. As is manifest from the documents that the authorities of the State were not, prima facie, responsible for non-disbursable of the G.P.F. amount, the petitioner would be entitled for interest on the deposits until the date the amounts became due for payment to the Late husband of the petitioner i.e. the date of his superannuation. The petitioner would also be entitled for interest from the date of submitting the withdrawal form until the date of payment at the statutory rate if the payments are not made to her within one month of submission of the withdrawal form. However, in so far as the claim for interest for the period from the date of retirement of the husband of the petitioner until the filling up of the withdrawal form by the petitioner is concerned, the petitioner, if so advised, may raise the issue upon the outcome of the proceedings pending before this Court in L.P.A. No. 1316 of 2002. The writ petition stands disposed of. S.Sb/- (Jyoti Saran, J.)