INDU DEVI Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this writ petition, Petitioner, who claims to be the widow of late Prem Kumar Dubey, who died in harness while posted as Proof Reader in Bihar Rastra Bhasha Parishad on 31.10.2001, is aggrieved on account of non -release of the amount of provident fund, pension, part of gratuity i.e. out of Rs. 2,30,590/ - she has been paid only a sum of Rs. 1,01,790/ -, besides this even the provisional pension has been stopped since October, 2002.

(2.) ADMITTEDLY , the Director, Bihar Rastra Bhasha Parishad, Patna (Respondent No. 3) is the concerned authority. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of Respondent No. 3 in which it is stated that Parishad has given the details of deduction to the District Provident Fund Officer, Patna Collectorate, Patna, and after issuance of the authority from the District Provident Fund Officer, Patna (Respondent No. 5) the Parishad will pay the amount. However, the Director, who has personally appeared, stated that the deduction statement earlier sent to the District Provident Fund Officer did not include the deductions made during the period 1981 -82, and, as such, the District Provident Fund Officer has not been able to issue authority. I failed to appreciate the manner in which the Director has conducted himself as regards the provident fund. The husband of the Petitioner died on 31.10.2001 and now it is almost over one and half year that she has been kept denied of the provident fund amount on account of the delay in supply of deduction statement by the Director. However, the Director has assured that he shall send the deduction statement for the remaining period by tomorrow. District Provident Fund Officer (Respondent No. 5) is, accordingly, directed to issue authority with up -to -date statutory interest within three days of the receipt of the sanction of the remaining deduction statement and the Director (Respondent No. 3) is directed to ensure encashment of the authority and payment of the amount of the Petitioner within three days of the receipt of the authority.

(3.) AS regards recovery, it is stated in the counter affidavit that the committee formed after the death of the employee prepared a complete list of books and periodical during his period and as a result of that shortage of books and periodical of Rs. 1,39,282/ - was detected for realisation from him, and, accordingly, the Director has issued instruction to the Treasury Officer, Patna on 9.5.2003 vide Annexure -C for recovery of the said amount from the balance of gratuity and pension. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner, on the other, hand, has submitted that earlier the Director vide letter dated 23.1.2002, contained in Annexure -2 sought for recovery/adjustment of Rs. 39,515/ - only from the pension/gratuity and now by Annexure -C another claim of Rs. 1,39,282/ - has been malafide raised by him for recovery from the death -cum -retiral dues of the deceased employee much after the death of the employee.