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

2021 Supreme(P&H) 393

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH, ASHOK KUMAR VERMA, JJ.
Union of India and another – Appellant
Versus
Ms.Richa Dewan and another - Respondents
CWP No.18236 of 2020
Decided on : 23-03-2021

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :Mr.Praveen Chander Goyal, Advocate
For the Respondent:Mr.Rupam Aggarwal, Advocate

Entitlement of the widow to retiral benefits despite the absence of nomination or marital discord, and the principle of awarding interest as compensation for deprivation of use of money.

Headnote:

Writ Petition - Release of Retiral Dues - Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1972 - Rule 54(8)(ii), G.L Bhatia Vs. Union of India and another, 1999 (5) SCC 237, Smt. Violet Issac and Others Vs. Union of India & Others, 1991 (1) SCC 725, Jodh Singh Vs. Union of India and another, 1980 (4) SCC 306 - The court discussed the application of Rule 54(8)(ii) of the Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1972 and cited relevant case law to establish the entitlement of the widow to retiral benefits despite the absence of nomination or marital discord. The court also highlighted the principle of awarding interest as compensation for deprivation of use of money.

Fact of the Case:

The widow of a deceased government employee filed a petition for release of retiral benefits. The authorities had wrongfully withheld the benefits, citing baseless grounds and allegations against the widow. The only issue remaining was the award of interest to the widow from the date the amount became due to the actual date of payment.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the widow was entitled to the retiral benefits as per Rule 54(8)(ii) of the Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1972, and cited relevant case law to support this finding. The court also held that the authorities wrongfully withheld the benefits and awarded interest to the widow as compensation for the deprivation of use of money.

Issues: The issues included the entitlement of the widow to retiral benefits, the wrongful withholding of benefits by the authorities, and the award of interest as compensation.

Ratio Decidendi: The court established the entitlement of the widow to retiral benefits despite the absence of nomination or marital discord, citing Rule 54(8)(ii) of the Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1972 and relevant case law. The court also emphasized the principle of awarding interest as compensation for deprivation of use of money.

Final Decision: The petition was dismissed, affirming the entitlement of the widow to retiral benefits and the award of interest as compensation for the wrongful withholding of benefits.

JUDGMENT :

ASHOK KUMAR VERMA, J.

1. The petitioners-Union of India have approached this Court through this writ petition invoking extraordinary writ jurisdiction under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a writ in the nature of Certiorari for quashing the order dated 5.9.2019 (Annexure P- 5) passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench (for short ‘the Tribunal’) whereby the Original Application (OA) filed by respondent-Richa Dewan for release of arrears of pay and allowances on account of retiral benefits accrued on retirement of her late husband was allowed and respondent-Richa Dewan has been held entitled to interest at the rate as applicable to GPF from the date the amount became due to the actual date of payment within a period of one month. It is to be noticed that at the time of issuance of notice of motion, learned counsel for the petitioners confined the dispute only to the extent of award of interest, which is reflected in the order dated 2.11.2020 passed by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court.

2. Briefly, the facts as culled out from the present writ petition are that respondent-Richa Dewan is a widow. Her late husband- Arun Dewan was placed as Additional Commissioner of Income Tax, Indore who was murdered on 10.06.2012 when he was posted at Indore. She was aggrieved against the action of the authorities whereby her request for release of arrears of pay and allowances, Death-cum-Retirement Gratuity on retirement of her husband and other retiral dues has not been acceded to, by the Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Indore. Aggrieved against the inaction of the authorities, respondent-Richa Dewan being the widow and legal heir of the deceased employee approached the Tribunal with a prayer for release of retiral dues like family pension and other service related benefits w.e.f 11.06.2012 along with interest at the rate of 18% per annum. However, during the pendency of the Original Application before the Tribunal, the department has released an amount of Rs.63,17,739/- on account of DCRG, encashment of leave, arrears of 6th and 7th CPC etc. The aforesaid amount was paid to her by the authorities on different dates in the year 2018. As such, the only issue which remained to be adjudicated by the Tribunal was the award of interest to respondent-Richa Dewan from the date the amount became due to the actual date of payment. The Original Application filed by respondent-Richa Dewan was allowed vide order dated 05.09.2019 passed by the Tribunal and the widow has been held entitled to interest at the rate as applicable to GPF from the date the amount became due to the actual date of payment. The department was further directed by the Tribunal to release the same to respondent-Richa Dewan within a period of one month. The aforesaid order of the Tribunal has been challenged in this petition by petitioners.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that they have released the amount themselves during the pendency of the Original Application, and therefore, no interest is liable to be paid to the widow. It is further argued that No Objection Certificate from parents-in-law and daughter of the deceased were required since the deceased had not nominated anyone for family pension and gratuity. It is also argued that the parents of the deceased wrote a letter dated 24.8.2016 stating therein that respondent-Richa Dewan had deserted her husband w.e.f. 12.7.2004 i.e. 8 years before his murder took place. It is also argued that respondent-Richa Dewan was responsible for his murder due to her illicit relations. It is further argued that a legal notice for seeking divorce was also sent by her husband, the deceased on 25.5.2012. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that due to all this, delay in payment of requisite dues has been caused.

4. On the other hand, learned counsel for respondent-Richa Dewan submits that immediately after the death of her husband, she had submitted the requisi

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