Research › Browse › Judgment

Patna High Court · body

1999 DIGILAW 527 (PAT)

Lalmuni Devi v. State of Bihar

1999-06-29

SUDHANSU JYOTI MUKHOPADHAYA

body1999
Order A counter-affidavit has been filed on behalf of Accountant-General, Bihar giving therein the details of action taken from his end. It is stated that a sum of Rs.3960/- towards gratuity with interest at the rate of 5 percent (5178.25) as prescribed under the Government circular has been paid to the petitioner in pursuance of authority slip issued on 8th May, 1999. Family pension had also been sanctioned which has been authorised vide P.P.O. dated 7th May, 1999. 2. According to the counsel for the petitioner, family pension at the rate of Rs.375/- per month has been granted from 1st March, 1989. In this respect, he relied on the Division Bench decision of this Court in the case of 'Bihar Pensioner Samaj' reported in 1996(2) PLJR 893 . On the other hand, according to the counsel for the Accountant-General, Bihar the pay has been revised with effect from 1.1.86 with clear stipulation of arrears of pay to be paid from 1st March, 1989. The revised rate of pension @ Rs.375/- per month has been rightly sanctioned and allowed with effect from 1st March, 1989 instead of 1st January, 1986. 3. Apart from the aforesaid position, counsel for the petitioner also raised grievance relating to amount actually released and paid by the Treasury Officer, Bhojpur. It was submitted that the pension though sanctioned and ordered to be paid by Accountant-General, Bihar at the rate of Rs.144/- per month from 14th March, 1973 onwards, sum of Rs.60/- per month has been actually released and paid by the Treasury Officer. 4. It was further submitted that though the G.P.F. amount has been released, in the meantime, the statutory interest has not yet been paid. So far as the gratuity is concerned, counsel for the petitioner submitted that the actual amount has not been paid by the Treasury Officer, Bhojpur. 5. Having heard counsel for the parties, I find that there was no deliberate and wilful latches on the part of the opposite parties and almost the total retiral dues have been sanctioned. 6. So far as the gratuity is concerned, counsel for the petitioner submitted that the actual amount has not been paid by the Treasury Officer, Bhojpur. 5. Having heard counsel for the parties, I find that there was no deliberate and wilful latches on the part of the opposite parties and almost the total retiral dues have been sanctioned. 6. In the aforesaid circumstances, instead of process against the opposite parties, I remit the matter to them with the following observation and direction:- The Accountant-General, Bihar is required to re-calculate the family pension of the petitioner to which she was entitled from 1st January, 1986, taking into consideration the pay revised by the Finance Department resolution dated 19th April, 1999, in the light of observation and decision of this Court made in the case of 'Bihar Pensioner Samaj' reported in 1996 (2) PLJR 893 . In this regard, appropriate decision be taken and necessary order be passed and communicated to the petitioner within a period of three months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. The petitioner is required to enclose a photo-stat copy of the judgment of 'Bihar Pensioner Samaj' reported in 1996(2) PLJR 893 along with a copy of this order. So far as payment of family pension as alleged to have not been made in accordance with the P.P.O. by the Treasury Officer, Bhojpur is concerned, the Treasury Officer is directed to look into the matter. The concerned Treasury Officer, Bhojpur (sic-if ?) on reconsideration comes to a con91usion that any further amount is due to the petitioner he will pay the same within one month from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. On the other hand, if he feels that the payment has been rightly made in terms with the P.P.O. already issued, he will forward the calculation of such benefits with a reasoned order within the aforesaid period of one month. The Treasury Officer is also required to release the gratuity amount as sanctioned, in terms with G.P.O. within the aforesaid period of one month. So far as the statutory interest and G.P.F. amount is concerned, the petitioner will ventilate his grievance before the Director, Provident Fund, Patna who in his turn will dispose of the representation by a reasoned order within two months. So far as the statutory interest and G.P.F. amount is concerned, the petitioner will ventilate his grievance before the Director, Provident Fund, Patna who in his turn will dispose of the representation by a reasoned order within two months. In case of non-compliance of Court's order, it will be open to the petitioner to bring the fact to the notice of this Court to take appropriate action against the erring officer/person. 7. The M.J.C. application stands disposed of with aforesaid direction and observation.