The heirs of a deceased employee must be paid the death-cum-retirement benefits along with the interest by the employer: High Court of Jharkhand

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.No. 73519 Niraj Kumar son of Late Ram Dahin Singh Resident of Sagarpur P.O. and P.S. Makdumpur District Jahanabad Bihar 1. The State of Jharkhand through its Chief Secretary Government of … PETITIONER 2. Secretary Water Resources and Irrigation Department Government of Jharkhand Ranchi Jharkhand Ranchi 3. Executive Engineer Water Irrigation Division Jamtara 4. Deputy Commissioner Jamtara. … … RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON BLE MR. JUSTICE DR. S. N. PATHAK Through : Video Conferencing) For the Petitioner For the Respondents Mr. Ajit Kumar Advocate Mr. Ravi Kerketta AC to AAG IV 14 10.08.2021 In view of outbreak of COVID 19 pandemic case has been taken up through Video Conferencing and heard at length. Concerned lawyers have no objection with regard to the proceeding which has been held through Video Conferencing and there is no complaint in respect to audio and video clarity and quality and after hearing at length the matter is being disposed of finally. Heard the parties. Petitioner has approached this Court with a prayer for a direction upon the respondents to appoint him on compassionate ground on account of death of his father and further to pay all the death cum retiral benefits with interest @12% per annum from the date of due till the date of actual payment. Facts of the case in brief as has been delineated in the writ petition is that petitioner’s father who was working to the post of peon in Irrigation Department Jamtara died in harness on 30.01.2007. After his death petitioner preferred regarding his appointment on compassionate ground. Petitioner was asked to submit Succession Certificate. After obtaining the Succession Certificate in Succession Case 2 No. 1 2009 issued by the Sub Judge 1st Jahanabad Bihar dated 03.09.2010 petitioner submitted the same along with required certificates. Thereafter case of the petitioner was forwarded vide Letter No. 374 dated 27.10.2011 by the respondent no. 3. Since case of the petitioner has not been considered by the respondents he knocked door of this Court by filing instant writ petition. Mr. Ajit Kumar learned counsel appearing for the petitioner very fairly submits that he is not pressing compassionate appointment for the present rather he is claiming payment of retiral benefits along with his sister which would be paid to them in view of Succession Certificate issued by the competent Court and also in view of P.F. Certificate. Learned counsel very fairly submits that since both brothers and sisters have claimed for payment of retiral benefits in view of settled principles of law and in view of equitable justice the respondents may be directed to pay retiral benefits to the petitioner in accordance with law taking into consideration the Succession Certificate and P.F. Certificate. Learned counsel further argues that petitioner’s father died on 30.01.2007 but till date he has not received the death cum retiral benefits and as such he is entitled for the interest also for delayed payment in view of the decision rendered in the case of The State of Andhra Pradesh and Another Vs. Smt. Dinavahi Lakshmi kameswari In Civil Appeal No. 399 of 2021 No. 125520]. Per contra counter affidavit has been filed. Mr. Ravi Kerketta AC to learned AAG IV representing State argues that entire facts have been brought to the knowledge of the State by way of rejoinder filed by the petitioner. Initially petitioner was praying for compassionate appointment which was not acceptable in view of settled proposition of law. However since from rejoinder it has now been gathered that petitioner is rescinding claim of compassionate appointment claim of death cum retiral benefits only shall be considered in accordance with law. If petitioner files representation annexing a copy of the rejoinder and required documents including Succession Certificate P.F. Certificate the same shall be considered in accordance with law. Learned counsel further 3 argues that since petitioner’s sister is also one of the legal heir of the deceased the entire money may be distributed equally amongst them. Be that as it may having heard counsel for the parties and after perusing the documents this Court is of the considered view that since petitioner has rescinded the claim for compassionate appointment and now pressing claim for payment of retiral benefits the same may be extended to him taking into account the Succession Certificate and P.F. Certificate. Petitioner has fairly conceded that if the respondents so desires they may pay 50% of the amount to him and rest 50% to his sister who is also legal heir of the deceased employee and no objection has been raised from either sides as they are siblings. Considering fair submission of the parties particularly petitioner I hereby direct the respondents that if fresh representation is filed by the petitioner annexing the required documents including the Succession Certificate Providing Fund Certificate etc. the same shall be considered in accordance with law and petitioner shall be paid death cum retiral benefits within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt production of a copy of this order. Since the decease employee died on 30.01.2007 and till date retiral benefits have not been paid to the legal heirs and as such taking into consideration the law laid down in the Judgment rendered by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of The State of Andhra Pradesh and Another Vs. Smt. Dinavahi Lakshmi kameswarithe respondents are directed to consider for payment of statutory interest also along with retiral benefits. With the aforementioned observations and directions the writ petition stands allowed. Dr. S.N. Pathak J.) RC 

Summary: When an employee has passed away, the death and retirement benefits owed to him must be paid by the employer to the deceased’s family along the suitable interest. This was held in the judgement passed by a single member bench of the High Court of Jharkhand consisting of Justice Dr. S.N. Pathak in the case of Niraj Kumar v The State of Jharkhand [W.P. (S) No. 7353 of 2019] pronounced on 10th August 2021. The petitioner, Niraj Kumar first approached the court with the prayer that the respondents give him employment on compassionate grounds due to his father’s death as well as pay his father’s death-cum-retirement benefits along with suitable a interest rate to his family. The petitioner’s father, the late Ram Dahin Singh was working as a peon for the Irrigation Department in Jamtara when he died on 30th January 2007. The petitioner had submitted the Succession Certificate along with the other relevant documents to the respondents hoping to be appointed to a post by them. However seeing that they refused to consider his application, he moved to the court hoping for relief through the present writ petition. The petitioner’s counsel later contended before the honourable Court that the petitioner was willing to forgo the appointment on compassionate grounds if he could just be granted the retirement-cum-death benefits with 12% interest that was owed to his family on account of his father’s death which took place more than 14 years ago. The petitioner brought to the notice of the court that he also had a sister who was a legal heir of their father and hence wished for the benefits to be given 50% to him and 50% to his sister. The case of The State of Andhra Pradesh &amp; Another v Smt. Dinavahi Lakshmi Kameswari [Civil Appeal No. 399 of 2021] was cited, where it was held by the Supreme Court of India that retirement benefits owed to an employee cannot be denied to his family if he passes away.