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

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN - PRINCIPAL SEAT AT JODHP
SOHAN LAL SALVI – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF RAJASTHAN – Respondent
CW 15289/2021



Advocates:
['NIKHIL JAIN', '', 'NIHAR JAIN', 'RAVI PANWAR', 'VISHAL JANGID', '', 'RAVI PANWAR', 'HEMANT CHOUDHARY']

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT

JODHPUR

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 15289/2021

Sohan Lal Salvi S/o Shri Lalu Ji Salvi, Aged About 58 Years, Dayli

Road, Bandoli, District Udaipur, Rajasthan.

----Petitioner

Versus

1.

State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary,

Department Of Pension, Government Of Rajasthan,

Secretariat, Jaipur, Rajasthan.

2.

Additional Director, Regional Office, Directorate Of Pension

And Pensioners Welfare, Uaipur.

3.

District Education Officer, District Udaipur, Rajasthan.

4.

Chief Block Education Officer, Panchayat Samiti, Sarada,

Udaipur, Rajasthan.

5.

Smt. Bhawna Gupta W/o Shri Shatrugan Gupta, At Present

Working As Principal Government Senior Secondary School,

Thana, Tehsil Sarada, District Udaipur, Rajasthan.

----Respondents

For Petitioner(s)

:

Mr. Nikhil Dungawat.

For Respondent(s)

:

Mr. Hemant Choudhary.

Mr. Ravi Panwar.

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN BHANSALI

Order

21/07/2022

This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking a

direction to the respondents to release the retiral benefits to the

petitioner expeditiously as per Rules alongwith the interest.

During the pendency of the present petition, several

orders/directions were passed by the Court and an additional

affidavit has been filed by the respondents inter-alia indicating as

under:-

“3.

That in this regard, it is respectfully submitted

that the Pension Department has issued PPO

No.1153826, dated 10.09.2021 in favour of the

petitioner, a copy whereof is submitted herewith and

marked as Annex.A/A/1.

4.

That the Pension Department has also made

payment to the petitioner towards gratuity to the

(2 of 4)

[CW-15289/2021]

tune of Rs.14,17,216/- vide GPO No.3234284, dated

10.9.2021, a copy whereof is submitted herewith and

marked as Annex.A/A/2.

5.

That the amount of commutation vide CPO

No.4175753, dated 10.9.2021 for Rs.11,68,893/- has

also been made in favour of the petitioner, a copy

whereof is submitted herewith and marked as

Annex.A/A/3.

6.

That the amount of State Insurance to the tune

of Rs.4,56,285/- has also been paid by the State

Insurance and Provident Fund Department on

16.9.2021 in favour of the petitioner to his SBI A/c

No.51083985286, a copy whereof is submitted

herewith and marked as Annex.A/A/4.

7.

That apart from above, Bill No.165/29.1.2022

for Rs.468368/- towards leave encashment has also

been sent by the School to the Treasury Office for

payment to the petitioner towards 156 P.L. in his

account vide ECS Slip dated 4.2.2022. A copy

whereof is submitted herewith and marked as

Annex.A/A/5. The amount would be credited directly

to the bank account of the petitioner by the Treasury

Office.”

Thereafter, the petitioner has filed additional affidavit giving

out the dates on which he has received the payment.

Today, when the matter came up before the Court, counsel

for the petitioner made submissions that as the respondents have

made the payment to the petitioner with delay, the petitioner is

entitled to payment of interest under Rule 89 of the Rajasthan

Pension Rules, 1996 (‘the Rules of 1996’) and, therefore, the

respondents be directed to make payment of the amount of

interest under the said provisions.

Learned counsel for the parties made submission on the

aspect of petitioner’s entitlement to get interest on the retiral

benefits.

(3 of 4)

[CW-15289/2021]

The provision of Rule 89, in so far as, relevant reads as

under:-

“Rule 89. Interest on delayed payment of retiral

benefits:

(1) If the payment of retiral benefits has been

authorised after 60 days from the date when its

payment became due, and it is established that the

delay in payment was not on account of failure on the

part of the Government Servant in compliance of the

procedure laid down in this chapter or elsewhere in

these rules, interest @ 9% per annum from the date

re

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