SHIV SHANKAR LAL Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present writ petition has been filed seeking a direction upon the respondent- State authorities, especially the Executive Officer, Nagar Parishad, Dehri, Dalmianagar, Dehri On Sone, District-Rohtas to pay to the petitioner, interest @ 18% per annum for the delay caused in making payment of the admitted retiral dues of the petitioner herein, as has been explained at length in a tabular form in paragraph no. (1)(i) of the writ petition.

(2.) The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner was working as Head Clerk-cum-Accountant with Dehri- Dalmianagar Municipality and retired on 01.02.1997. It is the case of the petitioner that at the time of retirement, the petitioner was paid the gratuity amount only in part and that too, in the old pay scale. Similarly, he was paid leave encashment and that too, in the old scale. The pay of the petitioner was revised w.e.f. 01.01.1996 and since the petitioner had retired on 01.02.1997, his basic pay was also revised.

(3.) The petitioner had approached this Court by filing a writ petition for payment of the retiral dues which was disposed off by this Court and on account of non-compliance of the order passed by this Court, the petitioner had to file a contempt petition bearing M.J.C. no. 1905 of 2014, which was disposed off by this Court vide order dated 20.07.2017 with the following observations that," In case, the petitioner feels that there is unexplained inordinate delay in settling the claim and he is entitled to interest, liberty shall be granted to the petitioner to claim interest in accordance with law." It is thereafter that the petitioner has filed the present writ petition for grant of interest upon the delayed payment of retiral dues of the petitioner herein. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is entitled for interest on the delayed payment of the retiral dues and for this purpose, he has relied upon a judgment rendered by the Division Bench of this Court, reported in 2010 (3) PLJR 906 (Sudha Kumari vs. Ram Pavitra Singh), paragraphs 9 and 10 whereof, are reproduced hereinbelow :-