SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2001 Supreme(Pat) 495

PATNA HIGH COURT
Radha Mohan Prasad, J.
Ranjit Kumar
Versus
State Of Bihar
CIVIL WRIT JURISDICTION CASE No. 5271 of 2001 ;
Decided On : JUNE 27, 2001

Withholding of pension and gratuity requires initiation of departmental or judicial proceedings against the pensioner as per the Bihar Pension Rules, 1950, Rule 43. Interest on G.P.F. is payable as per the Bihar G.P.F. Rules, 1948, Rule 14.

Headnote:

G.P.F. - Pension and Gratuity - Bihar G.P.F. Rules, 1948, Rule 14; Bihar Pension Rules, 1950, Rule 43 - Summary: The court directed the authorities to consider and dispose of the petitioner's representation for payment of interest on G.P.F. and to issue authorization for the remaining amount, if found payable. The court also found the withholding of pension and gratuity unjustified and directed the respondents to issue necessary sanction orders for payment within a specified time frame.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner, a retired Deputy Director of Health, Bihar, challenged the withholding of 10% of his pension, full gratuity, and non-payment of G.P.F. for the period 1980-81 and 1981-82, along with statutory interest on the entire G.P.F. up to April 2001.

Finding of the Court:

The court directed the authorities to consider and dispose of the petitioner's representation for payment of interest on G.P.F. and to issue authorization for the remaining amount, if found payable. It also found the withholding of pension and gratuity unjustified and directed the respondents to issue necessary sanction orders for payment within a specified time frame.

Issues: Withholding of pension and gratuity, non-payment of G.P.F. and interest, involvement in an enquiry by the Vigilance for placing orders and receipts of medicines.

Ratio Decidendi: The court found the withholding of pension and gratuity unjustified as there were no departmental or judicial proceedings initiated against the petitioner. It also directed the authorities to consider and dispose of the petitioner's representation for payment of interest on G.P.F. and to issue authorization for the remaining amount, if found payable.

Final Decision: The court directed the respondents to issue necessary sanction orders for payment of the remaining amount of pension and gratuity within a specified time frame and to dispose of the application for commutation of pension, if any, filed by the petitioner.

Judgment

Radha Mohan Prasad, J.

1. The petitioner, who retired as Deputy Director,. Health, Government of Bihar, is aggrieved on account of withholding of 10% of his pension, full amount of gratuity and non-payment of G.P.F. tor the period 1980-81 and 1981-82 and the statutory interest on the entire G.P.F. upto April, 2001, so far.

2. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that under Rule 14 of the Bihar G.P.F. Rules, 1948 read with Government of India, Ministry of Finance Resolution No. F. 5 (1) FV (B) / 62 dated 1st May, 1962, the petitioner is entitled for interest on the entire G.P.F. upto April, 2001 as admittedly authorisation for payment of the same has been issued on 28.4.2001 vide Annexure A to the counter affidavit filed on behalf of respondent no. 5. However, he has not able to show that the said resolution of the Government of India has also been made applicable to the employees of the State Government. Moreover, the said Government Resolution provides that the payment of G.P.F. if paid after 15th day of the month then the person will be entitled for interest for the said month but shall draw the amount only in the next month.

3. On oral instruction learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner drew that said amount on 7th May, 2001. As such, according to him the petitioner is entitled for interest for the month of April, 2001. However, learned counsel for the petitioner has failed to show any such pleading in support of the fact that the petitioner drew the said amount on 7th May, 2001. Under such circumstances, learned counsel for the parties have rightly suggested that the petitioner may be given liberty to move the authority concerned for payment of interest on G.P.F. for the month of April, 2001. Accordingly, this Court directs that the petitioner may file representation before the authority concerned for payment of interest on G.P.F. for the month of April, 2001, who shall consider the same and dispose it of by a reasoned order within a fortnight of the receipt of the representation alongwith a copy of this order.

4. As regards the claim relating to G.P.F. for the period 1980-81 and 1981-82 the Joint Commissioner, Accounts, (G.P.F.), Bihar (Respondnet no. 5) in his counter affidavit has stated that after scrutinising and verifying the statement of deductions received from the Health Department, final authorisation with statutory interest for withdrawal of Rs. 6,43,710/- has been authorised under authority No. 611 dated 28.4.2001. The petitioner has not filed any reply to the said counter affidavit. However, in reply affidavit filed on behalf of the petitioner to the third supplementary counter affidavit, it is stated that the contribution made by the petitioner during 1980-81 and 1981-82 and the interest accrued thereon as per Rules have not been calculated till date as the District Treasury Officer, Bhagalpur (respondent no. 6) has not sent the statements of contributions duly countersigned by him to the Joint Commissioner, Accounts (G.P.F.), Bihar, Patna. Under such circumstances, as agreed, this Court directs that the petitioner may file representation before the Joint Commissioner, Accounts (G.P.F), Bihar (respondent no. 5) as well as the District Treasury Officer, Bhagalpur (respondent no. 6) with respect to his said claim which shall be examined and disposed of by a reasoned order by the said authorities positively within two weeks and authorisation for the remaining amount, if any found payable, must also be issued within the said time.

5. From the counter affidavit, it appears that payment of 10% pension and full amount of gratuity have been kept withheld on account of some enquiry by the Vigilance for placing orders and receipts of medicines by this petitioner from the Government Medical Store Depots. Learned Government Pleader No. 1 has submitted that the letters of the Assistant Director General, Government medical Store Depot, Calcutta as well as of the Assistant Depot Manag








Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top