Research › Search › Judgment

Patna High Court · body

2010 DIGILAW 128 (PAT)

Mosomat Noorjahan Khatoon v. State Of Bihar

2010-02-03

JYOTI SARAN

body2010
JUDGEMENT 1. Mr. Binoy Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. S.S. Sundram, learned Assisting Counsel to the Advocate General, Mr. Ranjan Kumar for the Accountant General and Mr. Dhrub Mukherjee, learned counsel representing the State of Jharkhand are present. 2. The petitioner who is the widow of an Excise Constable had filed the writ petition for payment of the death-cum-retiral dues as admissible to her late husband who died-in-harness on 3.9.1994. During the pendency of the proceedings, the admitted position is that the entire retiral dues as admissible to the petitioner has been paid to her. It has however been submitted that although the GPF amount has been paid to her in the year 2008 through Bank draft placed last Annexure-H series but the interest has been calculated only for six months. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as it is a case of an employee dying-in-harness, hence, in terms of provisions of the GPF Rules, the petitioner would be entitled for interest from the date of death of the employee, that is the husband of the petitioner who expired on 3.9.1994 until the payments were actually made to her in the year 2008. 4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State of Jharkhand submits that as the petitioner admittedly died-in- harness before the Bihar Reorganization Act, 2000 came into force, hence necessary payments would be made by the concerned authorities of the State of Bihar in terms of Section 52 read with Schedule 8(2) of the said Act. He further submits that appropriate directions may be issued to the respondent no. 7, the District Provident Fund Officer, Palamu to consider the claim of the petitioner and if it is found admissible, then the same may be communicated to the authority concerned at Patna for disbursement of the claim of interest of the petitioner. 5. I have heard the parties and considered the materials on record. 6. Rule 31 of the Bihar General Provident Fund Rules casts an obligation on the authorities concerned to make payment of the G.P.F a ount of a deceased employee in the manner provided. The State Government decision contained in G.O. No. F2-4076/59-633 and F dated 4.5.1960 in no uncertain terms further imposes a responsibility on the Head of the office to fill up the form and forward the same to the Head of Department. The State Government decision contained in G.O. No. F2-4076/59-633 and F dated 4.5.1960 in no uncertain terms further imposes a responsibility on the Head of the office to fill up the form and forward the same to the Head of Department. The Head of the office is also required to send the intimation of death of the subscriber to the Accountant General for issuance of necessary advice for further action in disbursement of the claim. 7. In the circumstances, the grievance raised and the claim advanced on behalf of the petitioner appears to be fully justified inasmuch as in the case of employees who die-in-harness it becomes the responsibility of the employer to ensure prompt disbursement of retiral benefits including Provident Fund to his widow and/ or his legal heirs and which is ominously absent in the present case. 8. In that view of the matter, this writ petition is disposed of with the direction to the District Provident Officer, Palamu respondent no. 7 to recalculate the claim of the petitioner for payment of interest on the G.P.F. amount from the date of death of her late husband on 3.9.1994 until the date of its final disbursement in April, 2008 and forward the same to the authority concerned at Patna for making payment thereof after adjusting the interest already paid on the said amount. 9. Considering that it is an old case and that of a widow, the entire exercise may be carried out expeditiously and preferably within a period of four months from the date of. receipt/production of a copy of this order. 10. The petitioner, if so advised, may also raise his claim for interest on belated payment of the pension together with relevant rules/circulars on the issue before the authority concerned and which should also be considered and disposed of within the aforesaid period of four months from the date such representation is filed. The writ petition is disposed of.