AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Heard learned counsel of both sides.
[2] Pleadings of the parties are complete.
[3] The petitioner initially joined in the service on 4.7.1983, as Peon (Group-D) in the Office of the Principal Officer (TW) under the Tripura Tribal Areas Autonomous District Council (for short, TTAADC). After completing a successful career, he went on superannuation in the afternoon of 30.6.2024 and thereby he became entitled to get all the post-retiral benefits.
[4] Ms. Sangita Ruhi Das, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that despite the petitioner having retired on 30.6.2024, the pensionary benefits were not provided to him in time. Therefore, learned counsel has sought for interest on the said amounts for the period of delayed payment.
[5] Mr. Bhaskar Debbarma, learned counsel for the respondents, submits that the benefits of commutation of pension, leave encashment and gratuity were paid on 3.7.2026. According to learned counsel, due to a shortage of funds, the said benefits could not be paid earlier. Therefore, the matter may be viewed with leniency.
[6] I have considered the submissions of both sides.
[7] The law has been settled by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of D.D. Tewari (Dead) through Legal Representatives vs. Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Limited and others, (2014) 8 SCC 894. The relevant paragraph of said decision is extracted hereunder:
“ …………..
4.The learned Single Judge has allowed the writ petition vide order dated 25-8-2010:CWP No. 1048 of 2010, decided on 25-8-2010 (P&H), after setting aside the action of the respondents in withholding the amount of gratuity and directing the respondents to release the withheld amount of gratuity within three months without awarding interest as claimed by the appellant. The High Court has adverted to the judgments of this Court particularly, in State of Kerala v. M.
Padmanabhan Nair:(1985) 1 SCC 429, wherein this Court reiterated its earlier view holding that: (SCC pp. 429-30, para 1)
“1.[the] pension and gratuity are no longer any bounty to be distributed by the Government to its employees on their retirement but have become, under the decisions of this Court, valuable rights and property in their hands and any culpable delay in settlement and disbursement thereof must be visited with the penalty of payment of interest at the current market rate till actual payment [to the employees].”
….………..
8.For the reasons stated above, we award interest at the rate of 9% on the delayed payment of pension and gratuity amount from the date of entitlement till the date of the actual payment. If this amount is not paid within six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, the same shall carry interest at the rate of 18% per annum from the date the amount falls due to the deceased employee. With the above directions, this appeal is allowed.”
[8] It is not a bounty or grace of the employer to extend post-retiral benefits to an employee; it is the valuable right of the employee to receive the same in due time. Such benefits are made payable to a retired employee against his valuable service rendered for the department throughout the career. Therefore, whenever such delay is caused by the employer in making such payment, the employee becomes entitled to get interest thereupon, for his sufferance for the delayed payment.
[9] Considering thus, the writ petition is allowed. The respondent Nos.1 to 4 are directed to make payment of interest at the rate of 9% per annum on the amounts paid to the petitioner on the counts of commutation of pension, leave encashment and gratuity, from the dates when same became payable till payment is made. Such payment shall be made within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
[10] The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of.
Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.