Disposed

Dr Radha Kant Kunwar v. the State of Jharkhand through Its Secretary

Jharkhand HC19 Jun 2019WPC/1627/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Jharkhand, noticing delayed payment of retirement dues to a deceased government employee's family, directed payment of arrears and imposed cost of Rs. 50,000 on the negligent official.

What did the court decide?

Payment of arrears of salary, pension, and death-cum-retiral benefits; cost of Rs. 50,000; enquiry into negligence and recovery from officials' salaries.

Dr Radha Kant Kunwar Vs the State of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Jharkhand HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

W.P.(S) No.1627 of 2019

¶3

Dr. Radha Kant Kunwar ... ... Petitioner

¶4

-V e r s u s -

¶5

The State of Jharkhand through its Secretary to the Government, Health Medical Education and Family Welfare Department, Government of Jharkhand, Nepal House, Doranda, Ranchi

¶6

The Deputy Secretary to the Government, Health Medical Education and Family Welfare Department, Government of Jharkhand, Nepal House, Doranda, Ranchi

¶7

The Civil Surgeon, Sadar Hospital, Koderma

¶8

The Accountant General, Jharkhand ... ... RESPONDENTS

¶9

CORAM: - THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DR. S.N.PATHAK

¶10

For the Petitioner : Mr. Ranjan Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Respondent-State : Mr. Prem Pujari Roy, AC to GP-VI For Respondent No.4 Mr. Suresh Kumar, Advocate

¶11

07/ 19.06.2019 The petitioner has approached this Court with a prayer for a direction upon the respondents to grant the death-cum-retrial benefit including Family Pension with effect from 14.12.2008 to till date with all retiral dues including General Provident Fund, arrears of pension w.e.f. 01.08.2003 to till the death of wife of the petitioner i.e. till 13.12.2008 with interest and also to make payment of arrears of salary w.e.f 07.09.1999 up to 31.07.2003 i.e date of retirement of the wife of the petitioner.

¶12

The case of the petitioner lies in a narrow compass. The deceased- wife of the petitioner was duly appointed on sanctioned and vacant post as Medical Officer in the year, 1972 in the District of Hazaribagh by the Competent Authority. Thereafter, the wife of the petitioner was transferred from Primary Health Center, Phulwarisharif, Patna to Sub divisional Hospital, Koderma now known as Sadar Hospital, Koderma by Notification No. 4083 dated 17.08.1999. Pursuant thereto, the deceased wife of the petitioner joined on 07.09.1999 in Sadar Hospital, Koderma and since then she has continued to discharge the duties till the date of her superannuation i.e. 31.07.2003. It is specific case of the petitioner that though deceased wife of the petitioner superannuated on 31.07.2003 but due to laches on the part of the respondents, the salary of the wife of the petitioner from the period of 07.09.1999 to 31.07.2003 was not paid and the same has not been paid till date. Aggrieved by the same, the wife of the petitioner made several representations before the respondents but her grievances were never redressed. Unfortunately, the wife of the petitioner died on 13.12.2008. Thereafter, some retiral benefits were paid to the

¶13

¶14

petitioner i.e. Group Insurance, Leave incashment and Gratuity. As the pension has not been fixed and arrears of salary has not paid to the wife of the petitioner, the petitioner has been constrained to knock the door of this Court. However, during the pendency of the instant writ petition retiral benefits were paid and pension is also fixed.

¶15

Mr. Ranjan Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that deceased wife of the petitioner a Medical Officer was unnecessary harassed by the respondents authorities as the retiral benefits were paid in piecemeal from 2013 to 2019 and not in her life time and even pension is fixed in the year, 2019 after filing of the instant writ petition. Learned counsel further argues that salary of 4 years has not been paid till date and as such, a direction be given upon the respondents to pay salary of four years of the deceased wife of the petitioner and also interest on the retiral benefits as well as arrears of pension.

¶16

Per contra counter-affidavit has been filed. Mr. Prem Pujari Roy, learned counsel for the respondent-State vehemently opposes the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner and submits that neither the wife of the petitioner nor petitioner himself has submitted the required documents on time rather the required documents were submitted in the year, 2013 and as such, delay and laches, if any, was on the part of the petitioner/ wife of the petitioner and not the respondentState. The respondent came in possession of the required documents in the year, 2013 only and action was taken immediately thereafter and retiral benefits were accordingly extended to the petitioner and pension has also been fixed. Regarding arrears of salary, learned counsel submits that during 1999-2003, the deceased wife of the petitioner had discharged her duties only for 27 days and as such, she is not entitled for arrears of salary of four years.

¶17

Be that as it may, having gone through the rival submissions of the parties, this Court is of the considered view that it is glaring example of high handedness in which a lady Officer has been harassed as the retiral benefits has not been extended to her immediately after her retirement. The respondents-authorities have not taken any care to pay the entire amount of death cum retiral benefits within shortest possible time but it was paid only after filing of this writ petition.

¶18

Time and again, the Hon’ble Apex Court and the different High Courts have held that Provident Fund is the hard earned money of the employees and it is not bounty or charity which is paid by the government. It is only because of the inaction and negligence on the part of the officers, the retired employees are deprived of their provident fund.

¶19

¶20

In the instant case, though the retiral benefits have been paid in piecemeal to the petitioner after the death of his wife and pension was fixed after filing of the instant writ petition, the deceased wife of the petitioner was deprived of her admitted dues as well as her salary.

¶21

In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, I hereby direct the Civil Surgeon, Sadar Hospital, Koderma to immediately and forthwith pay the arrears of salary for the aforesaid period for which the wife of the petitioner is found entitled along with a cost of Rs. 50,000/- (Fifty Thousand only) for delay payment of retiral benefits, within a period of four weeks’ from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Let the Civil Surgeon, Koderma hold an enquiry and fix the responsibility as to for whose negligence, the retiral benefits could not be paid to the wife of the petitioner in time. After fixing the responsibility, the Civil Surgeon shall issue necessary direction for recovery of the said amount from their salary.

¶22

With the aforesaid observation and directions, instant writ petition stands disposed of.

¶23

(Dr. S.N. Pathak, J.)

¶24

punit/-

¶25

Dr Radha Kant Kunwar v. the State of Jharkhand through Its Secretary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dr Radha Kant Kunwar v. the State of Jharkhand through Its Secretary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Lalita Pandey Vs The State Of Jharkhand And Ors.

Ajit Kumar Panigrahi Vs the State of Jharkhand through the Secretary Revenue Registration and Land Reforms Deptt

Basudeo Gope Vs the State of Jharkhand

Om Prakash Gupta Vs Home Department

Sumit B Binha Vs the State of Jharkhand through Secretary Personnel Administrative Reforms and Rajbhasha

Sukriti Prasad Mandal And Ors. Vs Human Resources Department