AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
N. Paul Vasanthakumar, J.—The prayer in this writ petition is to direct the respondents to pay the entire balance of GPF to the petitioner
with 21% interest and penal interest at 24% as contemplated under the Rules.
The brief facts necessary for the disposal of this writ petition are as follows:
(i) The petitioner attained the age of superannuation on 31.05.1994 and he was relieved from the service by the proceedings of the 5th respondent.
According to the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, even though the petitioner retired from service on 31.05.19 94, till date the payment
due to the petitioner with regard to GPF remains unsettled. The 1st respondent by his proceedings dated Nil.0 6.19 94, requested the 5th
respondent to furnish the details regarding the petitioner''s Account No. 4860/FOR missing credits etc. According to the petitioner, inspite of his
repeated requests, the GPF payable to the petitioner is not paid and ultimately he issued a counsel notice on 12.05.1997 and requested to pay the
GPF amount together with penal interest eligible in terms of Rule 13 of the GPF Rules. After the receipt of the said legal notice, the 5th respondent
sent a reply to the 1st respondent which reads as follows:
I wish to inform you that in my Office Letter second cited, the missing General Provident Fund credit details in respect of Thiru.D.
Balasubramanian (Retired Ranger) Accounts No. 4860/FOR have been furnished. I wish to bring to your kind notice that even after the retirement
of the said Ranger for about three years, his GPF final payment has not yet been made. The retired Ranger Thiru.D. Balasubramanian has
represented several times to settle his GPF final payment. Now in the reference third cited his Advocate has sent a notice to settle the GPF final
payment, explaining the hardships meted out by the retired Ranger.
I request that arrangements may please be made for issue of authorization for the final payment of GPF payable to Huzur Treasury, Trichy.
(ii) According to the petitioner, inspite of the said reply sent by the 1st respondent to the 5th respondent, the amount payable to the petitioner was
not settled. The petitioner sent another counsel notice on 19.08.1997 and explained the hardships faced by the petitioner and called upon the 1st
respondent to pay the entire GPF amount together with interest in terms of the said Rules. The 1st respondent, by letter dated 18.09.1997, stated
that a sum of Rs. 33,267/- (Rupees Thrity three thousand two hundred and sixty seven only) is available at the credit of the subscriber in regard to
which there is no dispute or doubt and also stated that as regards the balance amount, the District Forest Officer, Trichy, has not furnished the
required details.
(iii) According to the petitioner, the details were already furnished. The petitioner subsequently, by representation dated 20.0 9.1997, requested
the District Forest Officer, Trichy, once again to furnish the details as regards the GPF account. The District Forest Officer, Sivaganga, by
proceedings dated 09.10.1997, addressed to the 1st respondent furnished the credit and debit particulars relating to the petitioner. Inspite of these
efforts taken by the petitioner, the said amount is not released and therefore, he has filed the above writ petition.
A counter affidavit has been filed by the 1st respondent wherein it is stated that the missing credits for the following periods for which details are
required for adjustments:
10/70,11/70,3/72,5/72,9/79,2/83,3/83,10/83 to 3/84, 7/84 to 9/84, 10/85, 4/86 to 9/86 and 11/90.
It was also brought to the notice of the Department a sum of Rs. 14,567/- was withheld for want of debit details in 1983-84. According to the
counter affidavit, an amount of Rs. 3,000/- was paid as temporary advance from the GPF to the petitioner on 28.03.1984 and a further sum of Rs.
7,067/- was authorized in favour of the petitioner in December 1997. The missing credits for the above periods still remain to be adjusted for want
of the details from the 5th respondent. So, according to the 1st respondent, as and when the missing credits details are furnished by the 5th
respondent, the amount payable to the petitioner will be released.
The learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that Rule 13 of the GPF Rules contemplates payment of interest if the amount is
unpaid for more than three months and therefore, the claim of the petitioner is to be ordered with interest as per Rule 13 of the Rules. The learned
Counsel further produced a Judgment of the Hon'' ble Supreme Court reported in Ex. Capt. R.S. Dhull Vs. State of Haryana and Others, to show
that for the belated payment of retirement benefits, interest was directed to be paid at the rate of 1 2% per annum on the withheld GPF Fund and
Gratuity etc., from the date when the same is payable till the date of payment.
The respondents were served and the learned Counsel for the Forests Department, in the previous hearing, appeared and submitted that the
details as demanded by the 1st respondent will be furnished within a given time. No counter affidavit is filed by the respondents 4 & 5. In the
absence of any counter affidavit filed by the respondents 4 & 5 and having regard to the counter affidavit filed by the 1 st respondent stating that
for want of details to be furnished by the 5 th respondent, the petitioner''s terminal benefits are unable to be paid.
Taking note of the said submissions and also having regard to the retirement of the petitioner as early as in the year 1994 and the lethargic
attitude shown by the respondents 4 & 5 in not even filing the counter affidavit, even after 8 years, this Court is of the firm view that the
respondents 4 & 5 are liable to not only bound to furnish the details demanded by the 1st respondent for the missing credits for the months as
stated supra, but also to compensate the wastage of time spent by this Court. In fact, this writ petition was posted for filing counter on 15.02.2006,
21.2.2006, 6.3.2006,16.3.2006,22.3.20 06, 24.3.2006, 27.3.2006, 5.4.2006, 6.4.2006 and on 13.04.2006. Totally, ten adjournments are given
to file counter. However, no counter affidavit is filed. Therefore, it has to be treated as respondents 4 and 5 wasted this Courts'' time for which
they are liable to pay compensation.
The writ petition is allowed with the following directions: ''The respondents 4 and 5 are directed to forward the said details as demanded by the
1st respondent within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and on furnishing said the details by the respondents 4
and 5 to the 1st respondent, he is directed to release all the pending retirement benefits withheld in the credit of the petitioner along with interest as
well as penal interest in accordance with Rule 13 of GPF Rules, on or before 31.05.2006, as the respondents 4 and 5 have not chosen to file
counter affidavit and not taken the matter seriously. Taking note of the said lethargic attitude of the respondents 4 and 5, in wasting this Courts''
time, the writ petition is allowed with a cost of Rs. 5,000/- (Rupees Five thousand only) payable to the Hon''ble Chief Justice Relief Fund by the
respondents 4 and 5 within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.''
The writ petition is allowed with the above directions. For reporting compliance, post this matter on 12.06.2006.