BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
S.Srimathy, J.
A.Lingappan - Petitioner
Versus
G.Venkatasamy Naidu College, Represented by its Secretary and ors. - Respondents
W.P.(MD) No. 2248 of 2015
Decided On : 04-11-2022
Writ Petition - No Due Certificate - Tamil Nadu Pension Rules 71(2)(c) - 6% interest per annum - [ARTICLE 226] - [PENSION, TERMINAL BENEFITS] - [Tamil Nadu Pension Rules 71(2)(c)] - The court addressed the delay in issuing the 'No Due Certificate' and the responsibility of the petitioner and the respondents in the delay. The court held that the first respondent is bound to pay 6% interest per annum for the delay period from 05.05.2014 to 25.05.2016. The petitioner was also directed to pay a penalty of Rs.25,000 for not handing over the stock register and stocks in time. The court emphasized that each party should take responsibility for their mistakes and not set off their mistakes on the other party.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, a retired professor, filed a Writ Petition seeking a 'No Due Certificate' and pensionary benefits with interest. The respondents contested, citing delay caused by the petitioner in handing over materials and stock register.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that there was a dispute between the petitioner and the respondents regarding the delay in issuing the 'No Due Certificate'. The court held the first respondent responsible for paying 6% interest per annum for the delay period and directed the petitioner to pay a penalty for not handing over the stock register and stocks in time.
Issues: Delay in issuing 'No Due Certificate', responsibility for delay in pensionary benefits, and non-handover of stock register and stocks.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that each party should take responsibility for their mistakes and not set off their mistakes on the other party. It also emphasized the responsibility of the first respondent to pay 6% interest per annum for the delay period.
Final Decision: The first respondent was directed to pay 6% interest per annum for the delay period, and the petitioner was directed to pay a penalty of Rs.25,000 for not handing over the stock register and stocks in time. The Writ Petition was disposed of with no order as to costs.
ORDER :
PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the first and second respondents to issue “No Due Certificate” to the third respondent and consequently direct the third respondent herein to disburse the terminal, pension and other benefits of the petitioner with 18% interest per annum.
This Writ Petition has been filed for Writ of Mandamus, directing the first and second respondents to issue “No Due Certificate” to the third respondent and consequently direct the third respondent herein to disburse the terminal, pension and other benefits of the petitioner with 18% interest per annum.
2. The brief facts as stated in the affidavit are that the petitioner joined the College of the first respondent as Assistant Professor in Commerce Department on 03.09.1982 and was re-designated as Senior Lecturer on 04.09.1990, then was granted promotion periodically and retired from service on 30.04.2013. The contention of the petitioner is that though he had retired on 30.04.2013, he received a communication from the 1st respondent college to submit the petitioner’s pension proposals through Form V with necessary documents on 10.07.2013. The first respondent has not taken any effective steps to get pension, terminal benefits and other benefits. Finally, on 18.10.2013, the first respondent has sent the pension proposals to the third respondent, who in turn, forwarded to the fifth respondent on 17.12.2013. After perusing the documents relating to the petitioner's service, the fifth respondent approved the pension proposals through his letter Ref.PPO.No.P22/12210558/2PPO No.R2210558/EDA dated 03.04.2014. The third respondent vide letter dated 05.05.2014 directed the first respondent to send “No Due Certificate” in order to grant pension, terminal benefits and other benefits to the petitioner. On 13.01.2015, the petitioner submitted a representation to the first respondent to issue a “No Due Certificate”. But, the first respondent vide communication dated 27.01.2015 alleged that the petitioner did not produce the stock register when he was in charge of Fine Arts Club from 06.10.2012 to 30.04.2013. But the petitioner states that on 07.05.2014, the petitioner has sent a letter to the first respondent for issuance of necessary certificates which includes “No Due Certificate”. So that, it can be submitted to the authorities for releasing the pensionary benefits. Therefore, the petitioner sent a letter dated 12.10.2014 to the first respondent that he was willing to pay the cost of the Fine Arts materials which was not handed over and the cost of materials valued about Rs.47,872/-.
3. As per the direction of the third respondent, in order to hand over the articles of the Fine Arts Club on 29.09.2013, the petitioner entered the College campus on 09.10.2013. The petitioner searched for the items, but to the shock, he found several items including stock register and files were missing. On 09.10.2013, the petitioner was forced to hand over only few items that was available. Thereafter, from 10.10.2013 onwards, the petitioner was not permitted by the first and second respondents to enter into the College campus. Therefore, through reply to the third respondent, the petitioner suggested to invoke Tamil Nadu Pension Rules 71(2) (c), if proper assessment of the dues to the College could not be made. Even after the lapse of 20 months, from the date of retirement, the first respondent has not issued “No Due Certificate”. The petitioner was involved in several agitations organized by Teachers Organization MUTA. In order to wreck vengeance, the first and second respondents have not issued “No Due Certificate”. The petitioner further he is depending upon the pensionary benefits to run his retired life and hence seeks interest of 18% per annum.
4. When this Writ Petition was taken up on 17.12.2020, this Court had passed an order observing that during the pendency of the Writ Petition, the grie
Each party should take responsibility for their mistakes and not set off their mistakes on the other party.
Arbitrary delay in disbursement of retiral benefits violates Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution, necessitating judicial directions for timely payment and interest on delayed amounts.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the violation of DCRB guidelines by the respondent No.3, leading to the delay in processing the petitioner's retiral benefits, and the court's dire....
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 ....
Interest has to be paid on delayed payment of Retirement/Pensionary Benefits.
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.