Judgment R. M. Prasad, J. 1. As prayed,learned Counsel for the State is permitted to make necessary correction in the cause title in regard to the counter-affidavit which is said to have been filed on behalf of respondent No.3, though it has been on behalf of respondent No.2. 2. It is one of those unfortunate cases in which the payment of the provident fund dues of the petitioner has been kept withheld for now about eight years. 3. The petitioner superannuated from service on 31-1-88 and when the g. P. F. dues was not paid, he filed the present writ petition on 22-2-1996 with a prayer to issue an appropriate writ/order/direction commanding the respondents to release the payment of g. P. F. amount together with penal interest at the rate of 18% from the date of his superannuation. 4. Separate counter-affidavits have been filed on behalf of the Deputy Inspector-General of Police, C. I. D. (Economic Offences), Deputy Accountant General (Provident Fund) and director, Provident Fund7 Bihar, Patna (respondents No.2, 3 and 4 respectively ). 5. In the counter-affidavit filed on behalf of respondent No.2, a plea has been taken that the (sic) of G. P. F. dues could not be made to the petitioner as he submitted his G. P. F. paper on 5-9-1995 and in course of verification of paper and amount deposited in G. P. F. account, it was found that the above statement regarding the deposited money in the account of the petitioner and certificate of loans/advance payment from Darbhanga and Bhagalpur districts was not cleared/available. It is stated that regarding this, correspondence was made with the concerned Superintendents of Police, Bhagalpur and darbhanga, who sent the statements and thereafter the G. P. F. from with required statement was sent to the Assistant Director, G. P. F. , Bihar, Patna. Thus, it ts contended that the writ-petition is fit to be dismissed and the petitioner is not entitled to get 18% interest on g. P. F. 6. No details have been mentioned in the counter-affidavit as to when correspondences were made and as to when the statements were sent by the concerned Superintendent of Police. 7. Thus, it ts contended that the writ-petition is fit to be dismissed and the petitioner is not entitled to get 18% interest on g. P. F. 6. No details have been mentioned in the counter-affidavit as to when correspondences were made and as to when the statements were sent by the concerned Superintendent of Police. 7. However, in the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the Director, provident Fund (respondent No.4) it is stated that the application filed by the petitioner for payment of G. P. F. dues was forwarded to his office by respondent No.2,vide letter No.550 dated 23-3-1996 but the balance transfer of A. G. is not available in this office. According to the said respondent, A. G. Bihar has informed in his letter dated 21-3-19% that the balance transfer of the petitioner was sent to the District Provident Fund Officer, Darbhanga up to 1978-79, which according to the Director, is not complete in itself. It is further stated that the A. G. , Bihar has informed in the said letter that the record for the period 1968-69 to 1974-75 and 1979-80 to 1981-82 were not available and he was advised to obtain credit and debit statements for necessary correction in the about of G. P. F. of the petitioner. So, d. S. P. (Acctt.) C. I. D. , Bihar was requested, vide Office letter No.4957 dated 14-4-1995, to furnish credit and debit statement of the petitioner from 1975-76 to the date of retirement. According to the said respondent, D. S. P. (Acctt.), C. I. D. , Bihar, Patna only submitted credit and debit statement from the year 1971-72 to September, 1982 which is incomplete. So, D. S. P. (Acctt.), c. I. D. , Bihar, Patna was again requested, vide Office-letter No.6216 dated 15-5-19% to send credit and debit statement for the period October, 1982 to date of retirement of the petitioner. But no reply has been received as yet, so a reminder was sent again, vide office letter No.707 dated 25-5- 19%. It was, however, accepted that the D. S. P. (Acctt.) sent the relevant papers, vide letter No.784 dated 10-5-1996, whereafter an authority slip of Rs.15,596/- was issued in favour of D. S. P. (Acctt.) C. I. D. vide letter No.7686 dated 11-6-19% calculating up to date admissible interest. 8. It was, however, accepted that the D. S. P. (Acctt.) sent the relevant papers, vide letter No.784 dated 10-5-1996, whereafter an authority slip of Rs.15,596/- was issued in favour of D. S. P. (Acctt.) C. I. D. vide letter No.7686 dated 11-6-19% calculating up to date admissible interest. 8. Even according to the said affidavit, the aforesaid amount is in regard to up to date admissible interest calculated and not the principal amount of provident fund dues of the petitioner. 9. In the counter-affidavit of the accountant-General (Respondent No.3) it is stated that the closing balance as on March, 1982 in the said G. P. F. Account No. P-33147 was transferred to the District Provident Fund Officer, darbhanga as the petitioner was posted there during the year 1981-82. It is further stated that the balance transfer could not be traced out as the relevant record is torn due to constant handling of those records from 1- 7-1986 to 30-6-1994, during which period balances of about 4 lacs subscribers of the State government were transferred to the state Government were transferred to the Director, Provident Fund, Bihar and district Units all over the Bihar after closure of maintenance of G. P. F. accounts of the State Government employees after accounting year 1981-82 which was completed in the middle of the year 1994. However, it is further stated that the position of this account has again been intimated to the Director, Provident Fund, Bihar in a registered letter dated 21-3-19% for immediate necessary action and the copy of this letter was sent to the petitioner for information, as the work of maintenance of G. P. F. accounts of the State government. 10. From the facts aforementioned, i find that there has been gross laches on the part of the three authorities, namely, respondents No.2, 3 and 4. Under the rules, the statement in regard to the amount of G. P. F. deducted from the salary of the Government servant has to be intimated/sent to the concerned Government servant, but it is well-known and this court can take judicial notice of the fact that the said rule is hardly followed/complied by the concerned authority so much so that we the judges (sic) do not get such intimation. In the instant case, it is not the case of the respondents that the statement regarding deduction of G. P. F. amount from his salary was over sent/communicated to the petitioner, yet it is pleaded in the counter-affidavit that the application for payment of G. P. F. amount was made by the petitioner only in the year 1995 and thus, is not entitled for any relief in this writ petition and/or for payment of interest as claimed by him. 11. The custodians of the records were/are the said respondents. According to their own pleading, they had not maintained the record properly. In fact, in the counter-affidavit filed on behalf of the Accountant-General-it is stated that the relevant recordwas torn due to constant handling of records from 1-7-1986 to 30-6-94. It is really shocking that records relating to dues of the government servant and particularly the G. P. F. amount which is deducted from his hard-earned money during his service career are not properly maintained and get torn due to constant handling leading the Government servant being deprived of his own hard-earned money for long time even after his retirement. It is the responsibility of the respondents, including the Accountant-General, to maintain the records properly. A Government servant cannot be made to suffer for such long period by not paying his hard-earned money and/or withholding the same by the authorities on account of their own gross lapses. It is really unfortunate that despite repeated decisions/directions of this Court and also of the Apex Court for prompt payment of the post-retiral dues of the employees, such pleas are taken in the counter affidavit. The respondents being the custodians of the records, in my opinion, it is the sole responsibility of theirs that the post retiral dues of a Government servant is promptly calculated and paid after his retirement from service. The value of the money has increased steeply during the last eight years and yet it is contended by respondent No.2 in the counter-affidavit that the petitioner is not entitled for relief and/or for payment of interest, as claimed by him. 12. The value of the money has increased steeply during the last eight years and yet it is contended by respondent No.2 in the counter-affidavit that the petitioner is not entitled for relief and/or for payment of interest, as claimed by him. 12. In fact, it is a case in which heavy cost should be awarded as against the respondents which should be realised from the pocket of the Officers persons found responsible for the inordinate delay in paying the money which were deducted from the salary of the petitioned as provident fund] 13. Accordingly this writ petition is allowed. The Director-General of police, Bihar, Patna, who is the head of the Police Department and is permitted to be added as respondent No.6, is directed to get the entire up to date calculation of the provident fund dues of the petitioner completed and paid within two weeks of receipt of a copy of this order. The petitioner shall also be entitled for penal interest at the rate of 18 per cent per annum from the due date till the date of payment, besides the interest prescribed under the statute as well as for a cost of Rs.5,000 (five thousand) which shall be calculated and paid along with the principle dues within the aforesaid time. 14. The Director-General of police, Bihar, Patna (respondent No.6)is directed to fix the responsibility or non-payment of the dues of the petitioner within two months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order and the amount of penal interest and cost shall be realised/ recovered from the officers/persons concerned. 15. In so far as there being some laches on the part of the Accountant-General, Office is concerned, the Accountant General, Bihar is directed to enquire into the matter and take appropriate action against the concerned officer/persons by fixing responsibility within two months of the receipt/production of a copy of this order. 16. The Director-General of Police and the Accountant-General, Bihar are directed to report to this Court about the actions taken by them soon after the expiry of two months, period, whereafter the matter shall be posted for orders to consider regarding further action, if any, is to be taken in the matter. 17. Let a copy of this order be communicated to the Director-General of Police, Bihar, Patna and the Accountant General, Bihar Patna immediately. Petition Allowed.