Allowed

Kanhaiya Lal Gupta v. State Water Resources Dep Ors.

Rajasthan HC2 Dec 2019CW/17124/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the petitioner's writ petition, directing the respondent authorities to pay interest on delayed gratuity and pension arrears accrued from the date of retirement. The court directed payment within two months and imposed a penalty for default.

What did the court decide?

Directed to pay interest @ 9% per annum on delayed gratuity, pension arrears, and ACP amounts within two months with a penalty of Rs.25,000/- in case of failure.

Kanhaiya Lal Gupta Vs State Water… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Rajasthan HC (2019)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.17124/2012

¶3

Kanhaiya Lal Gupta S/o Late Shri Manna Lal Ji Gupta, aged about 65 years, Resident of Gokul, 8-B-11, Mahaveer Nagar-Iii, Kota.

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of Rajasthan Through Principal Secretary To The Government, Water Resources Department, Gover, Secretariat, Jaipur

¶7

Principal Secretary To The Government, Department Of Personnel, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur

¶8

Director, Pension And Pensioners Welfare Department, State Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.

¶9

----Respondents

¶10

For Petitioner(s) : Mr.H.V. Nandwana. For Respondent(s) : Mr.Arafat Hussain on behalf of Mr.Vivek Tyagi, Dy. GC., Mr.Pankaj Choudhary on behalf of Mr.Rohit Choudhary, Dy. GC.

¶11

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA Order

¶12

02/12/2019

¶13

The petitioner attained superannuation on 31.1.2007 and his pension and retiral benefits were withheld on account of departmental proceedings being undertaken against him. Later on vide order dated 19.11.2009, the petitioner has been exonerated of the charges levelled against him. He claims interest on the delayed payment of gratuity and other arrears of pension and retiral benefits from the date of his retirement i.e. 31.1.2007.

¶14

Learned counsel for the petitioner relies on notification dated 9.9.2008 to submit that Rule 89(6) note (2) of the Rajasthan Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1996 (hereinafter referred as ‘the Rules

¶15

(2 of 2)

¶16

[CW-17124/2012]

¶17

of 1996’) was amended and substituted and it was provided that “in cases where the Government servant was fully exonerated, the interest of delayed payment of retirement gratuity was to be allowed. The interest was to be paid on the prevailing rate of the general provident fund.”

¶18

Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the respondents submits that delay in releasing of the payment was mainly on account of the pendency of the departmental enquiry and an additional affidavit has been filed mentioning that all the retiral benefits have already been paid to the petitioner on the dates as mentioned therein.

¶19

I have considered the submissions and find that while the retiral benefits and arrears thereto have already been released to the petitioner, the interest of the amount due as on the date of retirement i.e. 31.1.2007 has not been paid.

¶20

Accordingly in view of the note (2) below of Sub-Rule 6 of Rule 89 of the Rules of 1996, the interest is directed to be paid on delayed payment with interest @ 9% per annum. Thus, the same would be payable on the amount of arrears for pension amount, arrears of ACP, amount on the arrears of revised pension as per the ACP amount on the arrears of gratuity encashment and P.L. The said payment would be released within a period of two months henceforth, failing which, an amount of Rs.25,000/- shall also be additionally paid. The same amount shall be recovered from the concerned erring officer, who has delayed in making the payment.

¶21

The writ petition stands allowed accordingly. All pending applications shall also stand dismissed.

¶22

(SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA),J

¶23

Karan Bhutani/531/273

Kanhaiya Lal Gupta v. State Water Resources Dep Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kanhaiya Lal Gupta v. State Water Resources Dep Ors.

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

M/S N.G.K. Transport Co. (Regd.) through Authorized Signatory and Managing Partner Vs Managing Director Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation

Praveen Parashar S/O Sh. Dinesh Parashar Vs State of Rajasthan through Principal Secretary

Smt Neelam Goyal Wife of Vishnu Kumar Gupta Vs the State of Rajasthan

Gopal Lal Saini Vs State of Raj and Ors.

Muralidhar Yadav Vs State of Raj and Ors.

Madan Mohan Sharma Vs State of Raj and Ors.