REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER (PENSION) EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANIZATION Vs. THE BIHAR HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present writ petition filed under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India seeks to assail the order dated 8.9.2011 passed by the Chairperson of the Bihar Human Rights Commission (for short 'the Commission') in File No. BHRC/COMP. 2399/10. The Commission, on appreciating the contention of the parties, directed for payment of a sum of Rs. 50,000.00 as compensation to the applicant-Respondent no. 5. The Commission, in the order, held as under:-

(2.) I have heard Mr. Prashant Sinha for the petitioner and Mr. Chakrapani for the respondent no. 5.

(3.) It has been submitted that on account of bifurcation of the erstwhile existing State of Bihar, two Pension Payment Orders were issued authorising pension in favour of the Respondent no. 5. This called for a vigilance enquiry. The Branch Manager of the concerned branch at Dehri was advised to stop payment of pension vide order dated 1.2.2007 (Annexure-1). The explanation was sought from the Bank as well as the Respondent no. 5. The Branch Manager vide communication dated 21.2.2008 (Annexure-2) clarified that the respondent no. 2 was paid pension in the light of two P.P.Os up to Nov., 2006. On verification of S.F. Account, there is no case of double payment of pension to the pensioner on the strength of two P.P.Os. Still, the Respondent no. 5 was not paid the pension which propelled him to approach the Commission for a direction to pay the pension and to compensate him on account of unjustified withholding of pension for several years.