Laxmi Devi vs Commissioner Of Police And Anr.

Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the deceased son (Anoop Singh) of the applicant was working as Constable since 1989 with the respondents. The applicant states that her son died on 29.01.2001 under mysterious circumstances and a case was registered vide FIR-83/2001 under Section-279/304A IPC at Police Station, Mangol Puri. The applicant and her husband were nominees in GPF account and Deposit linked Insurance Scheme (DLIS). It is averred that the applicant and her late husband made several requests to the respondents to release GPF and Insurance amount of their late son, after his death in 2001, but to no avail.

Vide letter dated 07.05.2015, respondent No.2 requested the Pay and Accounts Officers that the fresh authority of GPF final payment and DLIS with interest may be issued in favour of the nominee in GPF i.e. the deceased husband of the applicant. Vide letter dated 23.06.2016, the General Administration of respondent No.1 sent a memo to respondent No. 2 stating that the payment should have been made to the husband of the applicant who was the nominee, instead of paying it to Smt. Mamta, wife of late Sh. Anoop Singh and the amount erroneously paid to her should be recovered.

It is stated in the OA that wife of deceased Sh. Anoop Singh claimed pension and received some remuneration by producing forged documents before the concerned authorities. On 07.08.2005, Smt. Mamta, wife of the deceased son of the applicant remarried Sh. Rajesh @ Baniya. The applicant filed a Civil Suit for declaration in the court of Civil Judge, Tis Hazari. On 08.11.2013, the said Suit was decreed in favour of the applicant.

On 16.03.2017, the husband of the applicant expired. On 30.05.2017 and 20.11.2017, the applicant again requested the respondent No.2 to release the GPF amount to her along with interest. Finding no response, the applicant has filed the current O.A. seeking the following relief:-

"(i) Direct the Respondents to pay the GPF amount Rs. 1,80,597/-and DGIS Scheme Amount RS.35,780/- along with penal rate of interest @18% with effect from 29/01/2001 till the actual payment in the interest of complete justice.

(ii) Cost of the forced litigation."

In reply, the respondents submit that Constable Anoop Singh had filed a nomination form in favour of his father in respect of GPF, on 30.06.1989. He then got married to Smt. Mamta on 08.11.2000, but did not file any fresh nomination form. On 01.02.2001, the Constable expired in an accident. On 02.06.2011, the applicant filed a Civil Suit No. 211/2001 against the wife (Smt. Mamta) of her deceased son in the Court of Civil Judge, Delhi for permanent injunction, which was dismissed on 31.08.2002.

5.1 The applicant then filed an OA-2628/2002 before the Principal Bench of Central Administrative Tribunal, which was disposed of at the admission stage on 09.10.2002 with a direction to the respondents to consider the representation of the applicant in accordance with Rules and Instructions and pass a reasoned and speaking order within one month from the date of issue of the order. In pursuance thereof, the respondents passed a reasoned and speaking order on 25.11.2012 stating that the applicant is not eligible for the pensionary benefits as the deceased son (Anoop Singh) of the applicant, had left behind his legally wedded wife (Smt. Mamta).

5.2 The applicant filed another OA-856/2003, which was also dismissed in default on 29.04.2003. The applicant filed a Civil Suit No. 456/2003 alleging that Smt. Mamta (wife of the deceased son of the applicant) had no legal right to receive the pensionary benefits and the respondents No.2 and 3 may be restrained from releasing the arrears of gratuity, provident fund and leave encashment to her. The respondents filed a reply stating that DPWS, Leave Salary, Insurance Fund, Saving Fund and DCRG have already been paid to Smt. Mamta since she was the legally wedded wife of the deceased in terms of Rule-14(b) under Rule 54 and Sub Rule(4) of CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972. However, payment of GPF and Link Insurance had not been made till then.

Later on, the said Civil Suit filed by the applicant was transferred to Tis Hazari Court on 20.04.2006 vide Suit No. 15017/2006. In 2003, Smt. Mamta submitted forms for GPF final payment along with an affidavit that she is the only legal heir of her late husband.

Accordingly, after completing all the formalities, the GPF final payment case was sent to PAO, GPF Cell, Old Sectt. Delhi for issuing final payment authority in favour of Smt. Mamta, which was returned time and again with some objections. After removing the objections, the case was sent to PAO, GPF Cell, Delhi on 08.11.2005. The applicant again filed OA-13/2006, which was disposed of with the directions to consider her representation within two months. The applicant also filed CCP No. 118/2006 in OA-13/2006, which was dismissed on 29.05.2006 as the order of CAT dated 05.01.2006 had been complied with.

The respondents informed the applicant that family pension of Smt. Mamta has been stopped w.e.f. 07.08.2005 since she had remarried. However, she was also informed that the payment of GPF and linked insurance will be made after the final decision of her Civil Suit. Vide order dated 08.11.2013, the suit was decreed in favour of the applicant. Accordingly, as per the order dated 08.11.2013, the case was sent to PAO, GPF Cell, Delhi for issuing revised GPF final payment in the name of Sh. Jagram, the father of the deceased Constable. The same was returned by PAO with the objections

"submit the case in file with required documents to process the case afresh." The authority of Rs.1,20,597/- on account of GPF final payment and Rs.60,000/- under DLIS was received (without interest) from PAO, GPF Cell in favour of Sh. Jagram. A cheque amounting to Rs.1,80,597/- was issued and sent at the residence of Sh. Jagram, which he refused to receive as the same was without interest.

7.1 Unfortunately, Sh. Jagram expired on 16.03.2017. After detailed correspondence, the PAO has made a payment of Rs.1,80,597/- through RTGS to the applicant. A letter dated 20.11.2017 was also sent through registered post to inform the applicant that the payment, in question, has been made but the same was received as undelivered with the remarks "lene se inkar, vapis" on 20.11.2017.

The respondents, however, admit that consequent upon the death of Constable Anoop Singh on 29.01.2001, an amount of Rs.35,730/- on account of CGEIS was released to legal wedded wife Mrs. Mamta on 26.03.2003. Later on, Smt. Mamta was requested to refund/deposit the said amount erroneously paid to her, which she declined.

During the course of hearing, the learned counsel for the applicant Sh. Apurb Lal stated that the respondents have wrongly paid the DGIS Scheme amount of Rs. 35,780/- to the wife of late Constable Anoop Singh, since the nominee for the Deposit linked Insurance Scheme was Sh. Jag Ram (father of late Constable Anoop Singh. He emphasized that this fact has not been denied by the respondents and has been admitted as such in their counter affidavit. Taking the Bench through the sequence of events, Sh. Lal argued that the GPF amount of Rs. 1,20,597/- and Rs.60,000/- under DLIS is also due in favour of the applicant (Smt. Laxmi Devi). Since the respondents have delayed the payment of Rs. 1,80,597/-, in favour of the applicant, hence, the same must be paid to her with appropriate interest, along with Rs.35,780/- wrongly paid to Smt. Mamta.

Per contra, the learned counsel Ms. Pratima Gupta vehemently argued that the claim of the applicant for seeking interest on the principal amount of Rs.1,80,597/- is gross misrepresentation of facts since the applicant and her husband themselves are responsible for the delay. Taking the Bench through the corollary of dates, she emphasized that the delay, if any, was only on account of the stubborn attitude adopted by late Sh. Jagram, father of late Constable Anoop Singh, who refused to cooperate in the matter and refused to accept the payment of Rs. 1,80,597/- despite repeated efforts made by the respondents. Ultimately the respondents were left with no option but to make the payment of Rs.1,80,597/- to the applicant through RTGS in her Saving Account No. 01222201000262, Oriental Bank of Commerce, Charke Dadri, Haryana on 25.11.2017.

10.1 Ms. Gupta very fairly admitted that the wife (Smt. Mamta) of Constable Anoop Singh was paid the amount of Rs. 35,780/-, on account of CGEIS, inadvertently. Despite best efforts of the respondents Smt. Mamta has refused to refund the same.

I have gone through the facts of the case and considered the arguments advanced by both sides. It is not disputed that the husband of the applicant late Sh. Jagram was the nominee of late Constable Anoop Singh for GPF and DLIS. It is evident from the date-wise details provided by the respondents in their counter-affidavit, that after the Civil Suit went in favour of the applicant on 08.11.2013, the respondents kept asking Sh. Jagram (late husband of the applicant) to complete the GPF final payment forms so that the authority could be issued in his name. When he chose not to cooperate, the respondents sent forms to his residence. Subsequently, six letters were written to late Sh. Jagram during the period from 05.08.2014 to 10.05.2015 to attend the office to complete the necessary formalities. The respondents finally got the GPF form signed by him on 14.04.2015 by sending a special messenger for this purpose.

Thereafter the respondents then sent a cheque No.175983 dated 03.07.2015 for the principal amount of Rs. 1,80,597/- on account of payment of Rs. 1,20,597/- (GPF) and Rs. 60,000/- of DLIS, which Sh. Jagram again refused to accept being without interest. Due to the cussed attitude adopted by the applicant's husband, delay in payment was inevitable. The respondents had ultimately to make the payment to the applicant through RTGS in her saving account on 10.11.2017.

The respondents, in my view, cannot be faulted for the delay in payment of Rs. 1,20,597/- (GPF) and Rs. 60,000/- (DLIS) to the applicant since, in between they were also faced with the Civil Suit, orders in which had to be awaited before making the necessary payment to the applicant. Thus, I am convinced that there is no ground of payment of interest on the GPF & DLIS to the applicant.

However, the amount of Rs. 35,780/- on account of DGIS was erroneously paid to Smt. Mamta, legally wedded wife of late Sh. Anoop Singh on 23.03.2006 perhaps under the belief that she was the rightful legal heir. Though the respondents have asked her to return an amount of Rs. 35,780/- with interest, Smt. Mamta has refused to return the same on the ground that she was the legal heir of late Sh. Anoop Singh. She has also averred that late Sh. Jagram was merely the nominee and not the legal heir and as per law, nomination prior to the marriage should be revised after marriage. Be that as it may, it is the responsibility of the respondents to ensure that the amount of Rs. 35,730/- is paid to the applicant. The applicant cannot be made to suffer for a mistake committed by them.

In view of the aforesaid facts, the respondents are directed to take necessary steps to ensure that the payment of Rs. 35,730/- along with interest at GPF rates is made to the applicant within three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. O.A. is disposed of with these directions. No costs.