Research › Search › Judgment

Patna High Court · body

2000 DIGILAW 800 (PAT)

Subhadra Sinha v. State Of Bihar

2000-06-28

R.M.PRASAD

body2000
Judgment 1. In this writ petition the petitioner is the widow of Late Janardan Prasad Sinha, who died in harness on 1.12.1985 while working as Saristadar of Deoghar Civil Court. Despite lapse of almost 15 long years. the petitioner has not been paid the provident fund amount of her deceased husband. 2. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the Accountant General, Bihar, Patna (respondent no. 3) in which it is stated that the balance of G.P.F. Account No. AJ 6931 of the deceased was transferred to District Provident Fund Officer, Deoghar, vide No. Fund AJ/SF-920 dated 10.12.1992 and again a reminder was sent on 7.10.1999 to him with a copy to the District and Sessions Judge. A copy of the said reminder has been annexed as Annexure-A. 3. In the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the Deputy Commissioner and the District Provident Fund Officer, Deoghar (respondents no. 5 and 6), it is stated that balance transferred from the Accountant General, Bihar shows missing-credits for the year 1976-77, 1977-78, 1979-80, 1980-81 and 1981-82. From paragraph 8 of the said counter affidavit it appears that after receipt of the deduction statements from different places, ad interim authority slip has been issued by respondent no. 6, vide Annexure C, and in paragraph 9 it is stated that the discrepancy for the years 1976-77, 1977-78, 1978-79 and 1979-80 is yet to be settled only because the deduction statement has not been sent by respondent no. 4 till date though he has been requested several times and lastly on 7.2.2000 to send the same. It is further stated that the moment the above statement will be made available by respondent no. 4 to respondent no. 6, after proper reconciliation final authority slip along with the up-to- date statutory interest shall be issued. 4. No counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondent no. 4. 5. However, in the facts and circumstances aforementioned, respondent no. 4 is directed to supply the deduction statement to respondent no. 6 within a week of the receipt/production of a copy of this order. Thereafter, respondent no 6 shall sic issue necessary authority slip with up-to-date statutory interest. From the authority slip (Annexure C) it is not clear as to whether the interest has been calculated up to the date of its issuance. 6 within a week of the receipt/production of a copy of this order. Thereafter, respondent no 6 shall sic issue necessary authority slip with up-to-date statutory interest. From the authority slip (Annexure C) it is not clear as to whether the interest has been calculated up to the date of its issuance. However, in case the said authority slip does not include up-to-date statutory interest, then respondent no. 6 shall calculate the up-to-date statutory interest and issue necessary authorisation for the same along with the aforesaid authority slip within one week of the receipt of the deduction statement from respondent no. 4, failing which the concerned authority shall not draw his salary and other allowances till the order is fully complied. Respondent no. 4, to whom the authority slip (Annexure C) is issued, is directed to pay the amount of the said authority slip, if not already paid, forthwith on receipt of a copy of this order. 6. Having regard to the fact that the petitioner has been kept deprived of the provident fund amount for now almost 15 years without any plausible explanation, this Court finds it to be a fit case for awarding penal interest at the rate of 10% per annum, besides the statutory interest already paid/to be paid on the G.P.F. amount and a cost of Rs. 5,000 (five thousand), which shall also be calculated and paid to the petitioner within the aforesaid time. 7. The writ application is accordingly, disposed of.