GPoni IN THE HIGH COURT OF SIKKIM WRIT PETITION (C) NO.14 0F 2002 LJustice Malay Sengupta (Retd.) 1, Belur Station Road, P.O. Belur Math, P.S. Bally, Dist. -Howrah -711202 .... Petitioner. - VERSUS - 1. Thesecretary, Government of India, Ministry of Law and LJustice (Department of Justice), Jaisalmer House, Man Singh Road, New Delhi -Ilo 011. 2. The chiefcontroller of Accounts (Pension), Central Pension Accounting Office, Trikoot -11, Bhikaji Kama Place, New Delhi -110 066. 3. The Finance Secretary, Government of Sikkim, Tashiling' Gangtok, Sikkim -737101. 4. The Registrar General, High Court of Sikkim, Gangtok -737101. 5. The senior Deputy Accountant General (A & E), Sikkim' Gangtok -737101. ... Respondents. Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice N. S. Singh, Judge. i,dy> Present: Mr. A. Moulik, assisted by Mr. N. G. Sherpa, Advocates for the petitioner. Mr. S. P. Wangdi, Senior Central Govt. Standing Counsel assisted by Mr. Karma Thinlay, Advocate for respondent Nos.1, 2 and 5. Mr. N. a. Khatiwada, Addl. Advocate General assisted by Mr. iJ. 8. Pradhan, Govt. Advocate for the respondent No.3. Mr. H. K. Sharma, Joint Registrar, High Court of Sikkim for respondent No.4. Date Of Decision: July 28, ZOOS. JUDGMENT Strah- J. In this writ petition, the writ petitioner sought for a direction to the respondent-authorities to calculate and disburse forthwith the interest amount on delayed payment of arrears of pension amount and of commuted value of pension to him, by contending inter alia, that the writ petitioner, `Justice Malay Sengupta retired as LJudge of the High Court of Sikkim on superannuation on loth November 1998 and he duly submitted pension papers to the concerned authorities with a request not to give effect to it till the notification relat.ing to revised rates of pension etc. is issued and published by the Government of India and that, the Government of India revised the rates of pension of the "\cFz + Retired Judges with effect from lst January 1996 under a related Circular bearing No.L.11016/08/97-LJus. dated 13th January 1999 as in Annej"re-A to the writ petition and in terms of the said Circular, the Deputy Accountant General (A & E), Sikkim sent eligibility report on the pensionery benefits payable to the writ petitioner, to the concerned authority/Ministry on 22nd March 1999 as in A7t7ieJciJre-B to the writ petition and, on the basis of the said eligibility report /A7i7te"re-B/, the President of India accorded approval to the sanction of pension of Rs.1,56,000/-per annum along with other pensionery benefits vide, office letter dated 16th April 1999 as in A7ineJctJre-C to the writ petition and, in like manner, on the basis of the eligibility report mentioned above, the President of India accorded his approval to the sanction of Rs.7,13,700/- on account of commuted value of pension equal to Rs.6,500/- per month out of pension already sanctioned to the writ petitioner under another office letter dated 16th April 1999 as in A7trie"7ie-D to the writ petition and thereafter, the required Special Seal Authority was issued from the office of the Senior Deputy Accountant General (A & E), Sikkim in favour of the Chief Controller of Accounts (Pension), Department of Expenditure, Government of India under a related office letter dated 14th May 1999 as in A7i7tej"re-E to the writ petition and subsequently, pension payment order was issued on 27th May 1999 by the Central Pension Accounting Office, Government of India as seen in the document marked as Anne:"re-F to the writ petition and in the said pension payment order, the date of commencement of Residual pension @ Rs.6,500/- was wrongly noted as loth November 1998 which was the writ petitioner's date of superannuation and on which date question of payment of commutation value did not arise at all and the commuted value to be paid by the Bank was wrongly shown as "Nil" in the said pension payment order and since after issuance of pension payment order which was more than six months from the date of superannuation of the writ petitioner, only a sum of Rs.6,500/- per month was being deposited in the Bank account of the writ petitioner with arrears from loth November 1998 @ Rs.6,500/- per month and, no payment towards commuted value of pension was paid or deposited in the Bank account and accordingly, the writ petitioner had to remain contended with a paltry sum of Rs.6,500/- per month even without getting the commuted value of pension though the salne was duly sanctioned by the President of India and the authorisation of the payment of the same was duly made by the Accountant General of Sikkim. But ultimately instruction was sent by the Central Pension Accounting Ofrice under its office letter dated 21st December +\Qpr, 2000 as in A7ine"re-G to the writ petition for payment of arrears of balance amount of pension with effect from loth November 1998 @ Rs.6,500/- per month so far unpaid and also for payment of commuted value of pension and the amounts were worked as Rs.1,67,050/- and Rs.7,13,700 respectively as seen in the document marked as AmeJcttre-G and the banker intimated the writ petitioner under its office letter dated 9th January 2001 that they had credited the aforesaid amount totaling Rs.8,80,750/-in the pension-account of the writ petitioner as in A71nexztre-H to the writ petition. It is also the case of the writ petitioner that the payment of pension at the approved rate and the commuted value of the pension was delayed abnormally as it was paid only on 9th January 2001 though the date of the superannuation of the writ petitioner was loth November 1998 inasmuch as notification of the revised rates of pension was issued by the Government of India on 13th January 1999; Accountant General of Sikkim issued the eligibility report on 22nd March 1999; the approval of the President of India was accorded on 16th April 1999 and the Special Seal Authority was issued on 14th May 1999 and on account of such delayed payment, the writ petitioner raised protest and demanded interest on the entire amount for which he submitted representation and claim vide, representation dated 20th March 2001 to the authorities •\ev/ ® concerned as seen in the document marked as An7ie:x"re-J to the writ petition and the claim of the writ petitioner was justified by the Senior Deputy Accountant General (A & E), Sikkim under his office letter dated 17th April 2001 as in Arinej"re-Jr to the writ petition and in the mean time, this Court took up the matter suo motu under Writ Petition (C) No.23 of 2001 and in the said writ petition, the Deputy Secretary in the Department of Justice of the Ministry of Law, LJustice and the Company Affairs filed counter affidavit wherein it has been contended that since Rule 19A(i) of the All India Services (DCRG) Rules, 1959 did not provide for interest of delayed payment of pension, leave encashment, commuted value of pension etc., the petitioner was not entitled any interest on the delayed payment of any retirement benefit except that of death-cum-retirement gratuity and, in the said writ petition, this Court by an order dated 16th October 2001 directed the writ petitioner to submit a representation to the Department of LJustice, Government of India and accordingly, he submitted the representation on 19th November 2001 as in A7i7tejct/re-K to the writ petition and thereafter, the said writ petition was finally disposed of on 24th January 2002 with a liberty to the writ petitioner to approach the appropriate authority or appropriate forum or court for redressal of such grievance as in A7i7tej"re-I to the •\dry writ petition. The writ petitioner also highlighted the fact that his present claim confined to the extent of interest on the outstanding balance and commuted value of pension which remained unpaid so far and was paid only on 9th January 2001. Supporting the case of the writ petitioner, Mr. A. Moulik, learned counsel submitted that despite the existence of the specific orders of the President of India and the related notifications thereof dated 13th January 1999, 22nd March 1999, 16th April 1999, and also order/office letter pertaining to required Special Seal Authority as in Armejmures -A, 8, C, D and E to the writ petition as well as the claim and approach made by the writ petitioner, the respondent-authorities concerned did not disburse or afford the interest over the arrears amount of pension and of commuted value of pension to the writ petitioner which is the legitimate claim of the writ petitioner. It is also further argued that the respondent- authorities, particularly, the respondent Nos.1 and 2 are mainly responsible for causing unnecessary and inordinate delay in settling the matter and making the payment of the outstanding balance of the pension amount and the commuted value of pension and as such, they are bound to +i!Tt. pay interest for delayed payment on such arrears of pension and commuted value of pension. According to Mr. Moulik, learned counsel, because of the inaction and failure on the part of the respondent Nos.1 and 2 in not settling the matter in time, the delay has been caused in making payment of such arrears of pension and commuted value of pension to the writ petitioner for which the reasonable rate of interest should be given to the writ petitioner by the said respondent Nos.1 and 2/authorities. Supporting his submission, Mr. Moulik, learned counsel has relied upon the following decisions of the Apex Cottrt rendered in: - i. Stoke Of Kerala a ors. v. M. Padmanabhan Nair reported in AIR J985 SC 356. 0. P. Gupta v. Union Of India & ors. reported in (1987) 4 SCC 328. 3. Dr. Uma Agrawal v. Stoke Of U.P. 8b c.nr. reported in /]999/ 3 SCC 438. 4. R. P. Kapur v. Union of India & ors. reported ±n (1999) 8 SCC 110. 5. MohLd. Zameeruddin Siddiqui v. Executive Cour.Oil, A.M.U. & anr. reported in (2000) 9 SCC 48. The case of the writ petitioner is resisted by the respondent Nos.1, 2, 3 and 5 by filing respective counter +#s, particularly, the respondent Nosl and 2 According to the respondent No.1, the Ministry of Law, Justice & Company Affairs (Department of Justice) duly conveyed the sanction of the President of India to the Senior Accountant General (A & E), Sikkim for payment of pensionery benefits/commuted value of pension vide, sanction letters dated 16th April 1999 as in A7tnexLtres-C and D to the writ petition without any delay and as such, there was no lapses on the part of the respondent No.1 in affording the pensionery benefits to the writ petitioner. Mr. S. P. Wangdi, learned Senior Central Government Standing Counsel appearing for respondent Nos.1, 2 and 5 contended that arrangement for making payments of retiral benefits was duly made by the authorities concerned and the writ petitioner had been paid all the retiral benefits and there was no delay on the part of the authorities concerned in conveying sanction for grant of pensionery benefits in respect of the writ petitioner. According to the respondent No.2, it is inconsistent to claim interest both for pension as well as commuted value of pension on the part of the writ petitioner and as such the writ petitioner has not clearly spelt what his case is about and the commuted value of pension was paid to the writ petitioner on 9th January 2001 and for the preceding period from llth November 1998 to 8th LJanuary 2001, remaining 50% pension has also been paid to him, in other words, +\cpr, 10 the writ petitioner has received full pension from llth November 1998 to 8th January 2001 and reduced pension from 9th January 2001 and apart from that reduced pension after commutation is being paid to him from 9th January 2001 and as such nothing more remains to be paid to him. It is also the case of the respondent Nos.1 and 2 that there was no provision under the Central Civil Service (Pension) Rules with regard to the payment of interest on pension, commutation value of pension etc. Mr. Wangdi, learned Senior Central Government Standing Counsel, supporting the case of the said respondents argued that the respondents had explained their bonafide action in the matter and gave cogent reasons in their respective counter affidavits in the matter of payment of retiral benefits to the writ petitioner and as such, the relief sought for by the writ petitioner in the writ petition should not be granted by this Court and the writ petition deserves its outright dismissal. The case of the respondent No.3, i.e. Finance Department, Government of Sikkim is that the Central Pension Accounting Office, Ministry of Finance, Government of India, the respondent No.2 herein, is to arrange for payment of retiral benefits to the retired Judges of the High ti6\6y 11 Courts as in the case of Central Government Civil Pensioners with effect from lst January 1990. In other words, pension payment orders in respect of the retired High Court Judges will be issued by the State Accountant General and sent to the Central Pension Accounting Office for arranging payments. The case of the State-respondents is supported by Mr. N. 8. Khatiwada, learned Additional Advocate General for the State of Sikkim. The plea/stand taken by the respondent No.5 is that the role of the office of the Senior Deputy Accountant General (A & E), Sikkim being only to calculate the pensionery benefits and then to issue required Special Seal Authority on receipt of sanction from the Ministry of Law, LJustice and Company Affairs, all the required actions have been taken promptly as far as practicable and the authorisation letters to all the concerned authorities were issued on 14th May 1999 for arranging payment of the pensionery benefits to the writ petitioner and as such, there is no lapses on the part of the respondent No.5 in arranging the payment of retiral benefits as claimed by the writ petitioner. -`-::`1=- 12 Now, this Court is to see and examine as to whether the writ petitioner has enforceable legal right in the instant case or not; and whether the reliefs sought for by the writ petitioner in his writ petition can be granted or not? Upon hearing the learned counsel for the parties and also on perusal of the available materials on record, it appears to me that a very important issue/question arises in the instant case as to whether there is a delay in arranging the payment of retiral benefits, particularly, pension and the commuted value of pension as claimed by the writ petitioner in his writ petition and if there is delay in doing so, who is responsible for it and, whether the writ petitioner shall be entit.led the reasonable interest as claimed by him in his writ petition or not ? After proper application of my mind in this matter, I am of the view that there is no lapses on the part of the respondent No.1, 3, 4 and 5 in making arrangement of payment of retiral benefits to the writ petitioner for the following reasons: - The petitioner retired as Judge of the High Court of Sikkim on superannuation on loth November 1998 `.\cey, 13 and at the appropriate time, he duly submitted pension papers to the concerned authorities with a request not to give effect to the same till the revised rates of pension of the retired Judges are issued by the Government of India which was looked into by the concerned authorities. According to me, the respondent No.1 had promptly acted upon the matter pertaining to the grant of revised pension etc. to the retired Judges of the High Courts and Supreme Court as seen in the documents marked as A7i7iejx"re-A to the writ petition which is the Government of India circular dated 13th LJanuary 1999 issued by the Ministry of Law, Justice and Company Affairs (Department of LJustice) and in pursuance of it, the Deputy Accountant General (A & E), Sikkim sent eligibility report on the pensionery benefits payable to the writ petitioner vide, office letter dated 22nd March 1999 as in Armexztre-B, in time which was duly acted upon by the Ministry of Law, Justice and Company Affairs (Department of LJustice) as seen in the related office letters dated 16th April 1999 as in A7i7Lejoures-C and D to the writ petition which are very important in the present case for just determination of the real points in controversy between the parties and, accordingly, these are quoted below: - +*`+. , ^, de 14 ANNEXURE - C No.L-12029 / 1 / 99-Jus GOVERNMENT OF INDIA MINISTRY OF LAW, JUSTICE & C.A. ( DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE ) iJaisalmer House, Mansingh Road New Delhi, the 16 April, 1999 The Dy. Accountant General (Pen), O/o the Sr. Accountant General (A&E), Sikkim' GANGTOK -29. Subject: Grant of Pensionarv benefits to LJustice Malav SenguDta` Retd. Judge. Sikkim High Court. Sir' With reference to your letter No.TM/ LJUDGE/MSG/98-99/424 dated 22.3.1999, I aln directed to convey the sanction of the President of the payment of Rs.3,50,000/- (Rupees three lakh fifty thousand only) in lump-sum as Death-cum-Retirement Gratuity and a pension of Rs.1,56,000/-p.a. (Rupees one lakh fifty-six thousand only per annum) to Mr. Justice Malay Sengupta, Retd. Judge, Sikkim High court, w.e.f.10.11.98. 2. The sanction of the President is also accorded to the payment of family pension of Rs.7,800/-p.in. (Rupees Seven thousand eight hundred only per month) to the wife of Justice Sengupta, upto 9.11.2001 and thereafter at the rate of Rs.3,900/-p.in. (Rupees three thousand nine hundred only per month) till her death or re-marriage, whichever is earlier. The falnily pension will be payable, in case, Justice Malay Sengupta predeceases his wife and it shall start . from the date following the death of Mr. Justice Malay Sengupta. d`Of/ 15 3. The pension in the first instance is chargeable to the Consolidated Fund of India under Article 112(3)(d)(iii) of the Constitution of India and there after recoverable from the Government of Sikkim under Article 290 of the Constitution. Yours faithfully, Sd/- ( P. N. SINGH ) UNDER SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF INDIA Copy to: 1. The Chief Secretary, Government of Sikkim, Gangtok. 2. The Registrar, Sikkim High Court, Gangtok. 3. Mr. Justice Malay sengupta, Retd. LJudge, Sikkim High Court, Gangtok. 4. Guard file. ( P. N. SINGH ) UNDER SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF` INDIA" To ANNEXURE - D No.L-12029 / 1 / 99Jus GOVERNMENT OF` INDIA MINISTRY OF LAW, JUSTICE & C.A. ( DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE ) LJaisalmer House, Mansingh Road New Delhi, the 16 April, 1999 The Dy. Accountant General (Pen), O/o the Sr. Accountant General (A&E), Sikkim, GANGTOK -29. Subject: Commutation of pension - case of LJustice Malay Sengupta, Retd. LJudge, Sikkim High Court. A 16 Sir' With reference to your letter No.TM/ JUDGE/MSG/98-99/424 dated 22.3.1999, I am directed to convey the approval of the President to the payment of Rs.7,13,700/- (Rupees Seven lakh thirteen thousand seven hundred only) on account of commuted value of pension equal to Rs.6,500/- per month out of pension already sanctioned to Mr. Justice Malay Sen Gupta, Retd. Judge, Sikkim High Court. Yours faithfully, Sd/- ( P. N. SINGH ) UNDER SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF` INDIA Copy to: 1. The Chief Secretary, Government of Sikkim, Gangtok. 2. The Registrar, Sikkim High Court, Gangtok. 3. Mr. Justice Malay sengupta, Retd. Judge, Sikkim High Court, Gangtok. 4. Guard file. ( P. N. SINGH ) UNDER SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF INDIA'' A bare perusal of these office letters dated 16th April 1999 mentioned above show that the respondent No.1 had acted promptly in the matter pertaining to the grant of pensionery benefits to the writ petitioner in time and therefore, I am not in agreement with the statements and contentions of the writ petitioner that the respondent No.1 is `#leforthedelayinmckingthepaymentof 17 pensionery benefits to the writ petitioner, but I would say that it is the respondent No.2 who caused the delay in making the pensionery/retiral benefits to the writ petitioner with the following reasons: - In the process for making payment of retiral benefits to the writ petitioner, the Central Pension Accounting Office, Government of India, the respondent No.2 herein issued Special Seal Authority/Pension Payment Order on 27th May 1999 as seen in the document marked as Aririenct/re-A to the writ petition in the following order: - ANNEXURE - F PENSIONER'S COPY No.CC923905 CENTRAL PENSION ACCOUNTING OFFICE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA TRIK00T 2 BHIKAJI GAMA PLACE, NEW DELHI -110 066. EPABX NO.6174438, 6174599 FAX NO.011-6167326 (CENTRAL CIVIL PENSIONS) CC223905A spEciALSEALAUTHORiTy No.636589900017/242564 Date : 27.05.1999 To THE MANAGER, STATE BANK OF INDIA 9, G.T. ROAD DISTT. HOWRAH WEST BENGAL PIN -711101 Dy. No. :3002061 THIS SHOULD NOT BE DETACHED FROM PPO You are requested to make payment as per this authorisation below, (Details are glven in the enclosed P.P.O.) to SHRI MALAY SENGUPTA, holder of P.P.O. No. 63658990001 Paying Branch Category of pension i.giv ® 18 BALLY, A/C No.1957 SUPERANNUATION PENSION P.P.O. Issuing Authority Accountant General, Sikkim Basic Pension P.M. Rs.13000/-Date of commencement 10.11.1998 (Rupees thirteen thousand only) Residual Pension P.M. Rs.6500/-Date of Commencement 10.11.1998 (Rupees six thousand rive hundred only) Family pension at Enhanced Rate Rs.7800/-From To 09/ 11/2001 (Rupees seven thousand eight hundred only) Family Pension at Normal Rate Rs.3900/- From 10.11.2001 To (Rupees three thousand nine hundred only) Commuted value to be paid by bank NIL Sd/- PAY & ACCOUNTS OFICER NOTES: - 1. The Pensioner's portion of the P.P.O. may please be handed over to the pensioner after identification. 2. If pension papers do not pertain to your branch, please redirect them to the concerned branchy, under intimation to this office, to avoid delay. 3. Please see reverse for other guidelines for Banks and Pensioners. COPY FORWARDED TO: - I. (Pensioner) SHRI MALAY SENGUPI`A 1, BELUR STATION ROAD, BELUR MATH HOWRAH, WEST BENGAL -711202 2. The PAO ACCOUNTANT GENERAL,ACCOUNTANTS GENERAL SR. DY. A.G. (A&E), SIKKIM LAKARS BUILDING GANGTOK -737 101 GP = 119553 (A4) 14.7.2000 Send to RSD for rediary in Comm. Dy. But not Diary) " 10. In the said Pension Payment Order mentioned above, the date of commencement of residual pension @ Rs.6,500/- per month was wrongly noted/shown as loth November 1998 (emphasis given) which was the writ `#r'sdateofsuperannuationandonwhichdate 19 question of payment of commutation value of pension did not arise at all and moreover, the commuted value to be paid by the Bank was wrongly shown as "Nil" in the said pension payment order and since after issuance of pension payment order which was more than six months from the date of superannuation of the writ petitioner, only a sum of Rs.6,500/- per month was being deposited in the Bank account of the writ petitioner with arrears from loth November 1998 @ Rs.6,500/- per month and at the relevant time, no amount of commuted value of pension was paid or deposited in the Bank account of the writ petitioner, and accordingly, the writ petitioner was to receive only a paltry sum of Rs.6,500/- per month even without getting the commuted value of pension though the same was duly sanctioned by the President of India and authorisation of payment of it was duly made by the Accountant General of Sikkim as discussed above. But only on 9th January 2001, the commuted value of pension was paid to the writ petitioner and the remaining 50% pension for the preceding period from llth November 1998 to 8th January 2001 has also been paid to the writ petitioner and there is delay in doing so. According to me, the respondent No.2, Central Pension Accounting Office, Government of India caused the delay because of their inaction in the matter of settling such T=-:``-. - ® 20 payment as seen in the document marked as Anne"re-F to the writ petition mentioned above and in view of the existing facts and circumstances of the case, it may be mentioned that despite existence of the approval of sanction order and related office letters/circulars issued by the Ministry of Law, Justice and Company Affairs (Department of Justice), Government of India vide, office circular dated 13th January 1999, eligibility report