Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2010 DIGILAW 932 (HP)

Shamsher Singh v. HPSEB

2010-07-07

SURJIT SINGH

body2010
JUDGMENT : Surjit Singh, J. Petitioner in this case, who was appointed as Junior Engineer (JE) in the year 2000, in Himachal Pradesh State Electricity Board, respondent No. 1 herein, against a post reserved for Ex-service-man, has claimed interest on the delayed payment of retirement gratuity, commuted value of pension and arrears of pension. 2. It is stated in the petition that petitioner joined service as Junior Engineer with respondent No. 1 in October, 2000 and in the year 2003, he opted to surrender military pension to claim civil pension on his retirement from the establishment of respondent No. 1. He also deposited the amount of military pension, already received by him, together with interest in the year 2004, on being required to do so by respondent No. 1, vide letter dated 23.11.2004. He retired from service of respondent No. 1 on 31.3.2008. However, pension payment order and authority letters for payment of commuted value of pension and retirement gratuity, were issued on 31.3.2009. He, therefore, claims interest on delayed payment of retirement gratuity, arrears of pension and commuted value of pension. 3. Stand taken by respondent No. 1 is that order regarding exercise of option by the petitioner for civil pension by surrendering the amount of military pension could not be passed in his service book in the year 2004, when that order was passed and because of that delay took place in sanctioning the payment of retirement gratuity, commuted value of pension and issuing pension payment order. 4. From the very reply of the respondents, it is clear that delay has occurred because of administrative lapse on the part of the respondents and, therefore, they are liable to pay interest on the delayed payment of retirement gratuity, by virtue of Rule 68 of CCS (Pension) Rules and also on the delayed payment of commuted value of pension and arrears of pension, in accordance with the principle underlying Rule 68 of the said Rules. 5. Consequently, writ petition is allowed and the respondents are directed to pay interest @8% per annum, i.e. the rate equivalent to the rate permissible on General Provident Fund accumulations, from the date, when the payment of retirement gratuity, commuted value of pension and the pension was due, to the period when the money, on the aforesaid counts, was actually paid to him. Order be complied with within two months from today. Order be complied with within two months from today. Writ petition stands disposed of accordingly.