UCO BANK Vs. K SUGUNA LAKSHMI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Writ Appeal is directed against the judgment of the learned single Judge dated 21.8.2009 in W.P. No. 803 of 2001. The Respondent is the appellant. The parties are referred to as they are arrayed in the writ petition. Petitioner instituted writ petition aggrieved by the action of the respondent bank in not releasing the amount accrued to the credit of Provident Fund Account No 5311 of her late husband K. Markandeyulu.

(2.) Deceased K. Markandeyulu was an officer of UCO Bank. By order dated 23.12.1988 he was inflicted with punishment of dismissal from service. This punishment has become final. He died on 18.9.1998. While in service, he contributed to the Provident Fund Account bearing No. 5311 and an amount of Rs. 1,98,229.09 Ps was accrued to his account. The amount accrued to the above account was not returned while he was alive and there was no correspondence in this regard. After the demise of her husband, late K. Suguna Lakshmi started making requests to settle the Provident Fund Account and release the money. Since there was no response for a long time, late K. Suguna Lakshmi instituted Writ Petition No. 803 of 2001 alleging the inaction of the respondent bank in releasing the money due to them as arbitrary and discriminatory. During the pendency of the writ petition, on 19.08.2002 a sum of Rs. 57,028.09 Ps was released. Thus, an amount of Rs. 1,40,468/- was detained by the respondent bank. The respondent bank justifies the action in not releasing the entire Provident Fund amount on the ground that while late employee was in service, he availed Rs. 1,200/- which carried interest which was not paid by him and the amount detained is towards the amount due to the bank. During the pendency of the writ petition late K Suguna Lakshmi died on 28.10.2004. Sri K. Ramakrishna Anand and Smt. Sri Devi came on record as legal representatives of the deceased writ petitioner.

(3.) On detailed consideration of the matter, learned single Judge of this Court held that detaining the said sum was illegal, without power and jurisdiction and directed to pay the same with interest at the rate of 6% per annum.