IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
Arun Monga, J.
Gopal Lal Sharma S/o Shri Banshi Lal Sharma - Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary - Cum - Commissioner, Department Of Rural Development-Cum-Panchayati Raj and ors. – Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5120/2020
Decided On : 22-04-2024
INTEREST - Pension and Retiral Benefits - Rajasthan Pension Rules, 1996: Rule 80, Rule 81, Rule 89 - The court emphasized the mandatory provisions of the Rajasthan Pension Rules, particularly Rules 80 and 81, which require timely processing of pension papers to avoid delays. It interpreted Rule 89 to establish that if pension payments are delayed beyond 60 days without fault from the retiree, interest at 9% per annum is due. This legal framework influenced the court's decision to grant the petitioner interest on delayed pension payments.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, a retired Panchayat Extension Officer, sought interest on delayed pension payments after being exonerated from charges during an ongoing departmental inquiry. His pension and benefits were released after a delay attributed to procedural requirements from the Pension Department.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the delay in processing the petitioner's pension was not due to any fault of his own. It highlighted the importance of adhering to the timelines set forth in the Pension Rules to prevent financial hardship for retirees.
Issues: Whether the petitioner is entitled to interest on delayed payment of his pension and retiral benefits due to administrative delays.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that under Rule 89 of the Rajasthan Pension Rules, if the payment of retiral benefits is delayed beyond 60 days without fault on the part of the retiree, the retiree is entitled to interest on the delayed payment.
Final Decision: The writ petition was allowed, directing the respondents to calculate and pay the interest due to the petitioner within three months as per Rule 89 of the Rajasthan Pension Rules.
JUDGMENT :
Arun Monga, J.
1. Petition was filed in the year 2020 and claim of the petitioner was to seek directions to the respondents to grant him interest @ 18% per annum from the date of his entitlement on the delayed payment of pension/retiral benefits, gratuity as well as other benefits due after superannuation.
2. Relevant facts of the case are that the petitioner while holding the post of Panchayat Extension Officer, Panchayat Samiti, Chittorgarh was served with a charge-sheet dated 05.01.2018.
2.1 While the enquiry pursuant to the charge-sheet was still pending, petitioner superannuated from the service on 31.12.2018.
After superannuation he submitted necessary documents on 12.09.2018 in the office of Vikas Adhikari, Panchayat Samiti, Chittorgarh with a request to sanction provisional pension in his favour.
Vide an enquiry report dated 03.06.2019 petitioner was exonerated from all the charges levelled against him in the charge-sheet dated 05.01.2018.
A no objection certificate dated 20.09.2019 in favour of the petitioner was issued thereafter.
2.2 The Pension & Pensioners Welfare Department, Rajasthan on receipt of necessary documents from the office of Panchayat Samiti, Chittorgarh released pension, gratuity and commuted value of pension in favor of the petitioner on 07.11.2019.
The delay in release of pension by no stretch of imagination cannot be attributed to the petitioner, pleads the petitioner Hence, this petition.
3. The defence taken in reply to the petition inter-alia is that the Additional Director, Pension & Pensioners Welfare Department, Regional Office, Udaipur vide their letter dated 22.07.2019 asked for a few documents including form 5(k) that was to be submitted by the petitioner. The respondent Department vide letter dated 16.10.2019 addressed to the respondent No.2 intimated that no departmental enquiry was pending against the petitioner. Accordingly, vide letter dated 23.10.2019 request was sent to the Additional Director, Pension & Pensioners Welfare Department, Regional Office, Udaipur to release the pension and other retiral benefits of the petitioner.
Thus, it becomes evident that there has been no delay on part of the department in processing the retiral benefits of the petitioner. Hence, the petition is liable to be dismissed.
4. In the aforesaid backdrop, I have heard the rival contentions and gone through the case file.
5. The only controversy that survives adjudication before this Court at this stage is the petitioner’s claim of interest for the delayed remittance of his pensionary dues as well as regular monthly pension. From narrative of the facts which are not disputed, it emerges that indeed there was a certain delay on the part of the department due to the objections raised by the department of pension. Owing to which there was exchange of certain back and forth correspondence and eventually after satisfying the objections of the Pension Department, the necessary remittance of retiral benefits was made to the petitioner.
6. It is in contemplation of such situations that specific provisions have been made in the service rules that the pensionary / retiral dues of a retiring employee ought to be processed well in advance prior to the retirement so that he does not face any financial harshness post his retirement.
7. Trite law it is that pension is neither a bounty nor a charity nor a distribution of any largesse on the part of the State and it is hard earned benefit of an employee after rendering decades of service post superannuation.
8. In the context of starting the process of remittance of pension well in advance prior to retirement, reference may be had to Rule 80 and Rule 81 of Pension Rules, 1996 which is extracted hereinbelow: -
Every Head of Office shall undertake the work of preparation of pension papers in Form 7 two years before the date on which a Government servant is due to retire on superannuation, or on the date on which he proceeds on leave preparatory
Retirees are entitled to interest on delayed pension payments if the delay is not attributable to their own actions, as established by Rule 89 of the Rajasthan Pension Rules, 1996.
The court established that retirees are entitled to interest on delayed pension payments when the delay is not attributable to their actions, reinforcing the principle that pension is a right earned ....
Government employees are entitled to interest on delayed payment of pension and gratuity, and the rate of interest is determined based on the date the amount has fallen due, as per relevant legal pro....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.