AWADH BIHARI PANDEY Vs. CHIEF DEVELOPMENT OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has filed this writ petition for issuing a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to pay to him compound interest on the arrears of his pension and the amount of gratuity.

(2.) The relevant facts, in brief, are that the petitioner retired on 30.6.1981 from the post of Assistant Development Officer (Panchayat) from Varanasi. There were no dues against him. Despite several requests and hectic efforts, the matter of his pension and gratuity was not settled for long. Ultimately the petitioner was ordered to be given pension along with the arrears by an order of Accountant General on 15.7.1993, copy of which has been annexed as Annexure-I. The authorities calculated arrears of pension at Rs. 1,09,228/- and the amount of gratuity at Rs. 11,208.45. The petitioner has claimed compound interest @ 14% on the delayed payment as for all this long period he was deprived of his right to have the pension and gratuity which caused great torture and agony to him. The petitioner made a representation to the Accountant General but no action has been taken on that.

(3.) No counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondents Nos. 1, 2, 4 and 5 despite sufficient opportunity. In the counter affidavit filed on behalf of respondent No. 3, it is admitted in paragraph 5 that the petitioner retired on 30.6.1981. The necessary papers relating to his pension and gratuity were forwarded by the department concerned to the office of Accountant General as late as on 7.8.1992. The Accountant General released the retirement dues within a reasonable time on 18.11.1992. It is, further, stated that there is no provision in pension rules for payment of interest on delayed payment of pension. However, according to Government order dated 29.4.1983 there is a provision for payment of interest on gratuity where the delay is of more than three months due to administrative lapses. However the matter of payment of interest can only be sanctioned by the Government of Uttar Pradesh in the Administrative department. The aforesaid G.O. makes provision for payment of interest @ 5% per annum. In paragraph 12 of the counter affidavit, it is further stated that the parent department of the petitioner alone was responsible for the delay caused in the matter of finalisation of pension and gratuity of the petitioner.