STATE BANK OF INDIA,NAGPUR Vs. CHAITYARAM KOCHE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this writ petition, the petitioner challenges the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Nagpur dated 03/05/2013 directing the petitioner to pay interest on the delayed payment of retiral benefits to the respondent No.1 at the rate of 12% per annum from 23/07/1998 till the payment is actually made.

(2.) The respondent No. 1 is a retired railway employee. Since the retiral dues were paid to the respondent No.1 belatedly, the respondent No.1 filed an original application seeking a direction against the Railways, the State Bank of India as well as the Chief Manager, Centralised Pension Processing Centre to pay interest on the delayed payment of retiral dues. It was the case of the Railways in the said proceedings that the amount payable to the respondent No.1 was deposited by the Railways with the petitioner bank and the delay was on the part of the bank in releasing the retiral dues. After finding that the retiral dues were paid to the respondent No.1 belatedly in Dec., 2011, the tribunal directed all the parties i.e. Railways, State Bank of India and the Chief Manager, Centralised Pension Processing Centre to pay interest to the respondent No.1 at 12% per annum from the date of his retirement till the dues are actually paid.

(3.) Shri Anilkumar, the learned counsel for the petitioner, submitted that the tribunal has committed a jurisdictional error in directing the petitioner bank to pay interest to the respondent No.1 on the delayed payment of retiral benefits. It is stated that the respondent No.1 could have filed the original application only against the government or such local or other authorities or corporation or other bodies that are controlled and owned by the government, in respect of a service matter. It is stated that the respondent No.1, not being in the services of the petitioner bank, could not have sought a direction against the petitioner bank to pay interest on the delayed payment of the retiral benefits. It is stated that 4% interest that was accrued on the amount was paid to the respondent No.1.