WRIT PETITION 3545 of 2008 on 27 August 1962

1. The State of Jharkhand2.The Deputy Development Commissioner, cum Executive Officer,Ranchi, Zila Parishad, Ranchi 3.The Chairman, Zila Parishad (office behind Commissioner's office) Ranchi ……Respondents

---

CORAM

: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR ---For the Petitioner : Mr. Jai Shankar Tripathy, Advocate For the Respondents: Mr. Binod Singh, S.C. (L&C) Mr. Vishal Kumar Singh, J.C. to S.C. (L&C)--- 15/21.10.2016 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

The present writ petition has been filed for a direction upon the Respondents to release and pay all the retiral dues of the petitioner such as pension, leave salary, gratuity, salary difference between pay fixed in the 6[th] pay revision and actually paid to the petitioner.

The factual matrix of the case as stated in the writ-petition is that the petitioner was appointed on the post of vaccinator on 27.08.1962 in Zila Parishad, Ranchi and thereafter retired from the said post on 28.02.2001. After his retirement, the petitioner made several representations to the respondents authorities for payment of retiral dues, but the same was not paid to him. It has also been stated in the writ petition that similarly situated person namely Pradumna Mahto had filed writ petition before this Court being W.P. (S) No. 6211 of 2006. In the said writ petition, this court vide order dated 14.11.2006 has issued a direction that pendency of the case will not come in the way of respondents in paying legally payable and undisputed amount to the petitioner and in view of the said order, respondents have paid the retiral dues to said Pradumna Mahto.

A counter-affidavit has been filed on behalf of Respondent nos. 2 and 3 dated 01.08.2008. It appears from paragraph no. 6 of the same that the fund required for payment of retiral dues to the petitioner has not been made available to the Zila Parishad by the State Government, as such the retiral dues have not been paid. However, in the supplementary counter-affidavit filed by the Respondent nos. 2 & 3 dated 02.12.2011, it is stated that petitioner has already been paid admissible provident fund amount, gratuity as well as unutilized leave.

So far as prayer of the petitioner for grant of pension is concerned, the same cannot be given to the petitioner in view of the stand taken by the Respondent nos. 2 and 3 in the counter-affidavit date 01.08.2008 that as per Rule 1 of the Bihar Panchayat Samiti and Zila Parishad (condition of service) Rules, no employee of the Zila Parishad is entitled to pension.

Learned counsel for the petitioner however submits that though the payment of provident fund, gratuity, un-utilized leave has been made to the petitioner, but there has been great delay on the part of Zila Parishad, Ranchi in making payment of the same. Thus, petitioner is entitled for the interest over the said amount.

In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstance, I direct Respondent No. 2(The Deputy Development Commissioner-cum Executive Officer, Ranchi Zila Parishad, Ranchi) to make proper enquiry and to take a decision on payment of suitable interest to the petitioner on account of delay caused by the Zila Parishad, Ranchi in making the payment of admissible dues to the petitioner within a period of 12 weeks from the date of receipt/communication of this order. If it is found that the petitioner is entitled for interest due to delay caused by the Zila Parishad, Ranchi, the amount of interest shall be paid within 12 weeks thereafter.

In view of the aforesaid observation and direction, this writ petition is accordingly disposed of.

(Rajesh Shankar, J.)