B SUBRAYA BHAT Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE prayer in this Original Petition is to declare that r. 14 (4) of the Kerala Aided Schools Employees' Provident Fund Rules, 1967 thereinafter referred to as rules ) is illegal and violative of Art. 14 of the constitution of India. THEre is yet another prayer seeking to issue a direction to the respondents to grant the petitioner interest at the rate of 18 % per annum on the amount as on 30. 4. 199 3 available in his credit in the Provident fund Account No. C6059 from 1. 5. 1993 to the date of payment, that is December, 1994.

(2.) THE case of the petitioner is that after a long service he retired as Headmaster of the Aided Lower Primary School, Bayar on 30. 4. 1993. During his service he was contributing a portion of his salary to his Provident Fund Account. In September 1992, he stopped the contribution. According to the petitioner, he ought to have been paid whatever the amounts available to his credit in the Provident Fund on the eve of his retirement. It is also stated in the petition that courts have held that if there is a delay in payment of pension or pensionary benefits, aggrieved persons are entitled to get interest at the market rate from the date of retirement till the date of payment. On that basis, the petitioner would claim interest till the date of payment in December, 1994 on the Provident Fund amount received by him at the rate of 18% per annum. According to the petitioner, R. 14 (4) of the Kerala Aided schools Employees' Provident Fund Rules is arbitrary, irrational and violative of Art. 14 of the constitution of India and hence the same has to be struck down.

(3.) THE first question that arises for consideration is whether R. 14 (4) in so far as it lays down that the interest shall be payable only upto the end of the month preceding that in which the payment is made or upto the end of the sixth month after the month in which such amount became payable, whichever of those periods be less, is liable to be struck down. In other words, the provision that a subscriber to the Provident Fund on final withdrawal would be entitled for interest only for the period as stipulated i n r. 14 (4) irrespective of the fact when the said amount is paid can be said to be rational, reasonable and in consonance with the settled legal position.