Research › Search › Judgment

Patna High Court · body

2012 DIGILAW 1103 (PAT)

Sheo Dayal Ray v. State of Bihar

2012-08-08

RAMESH KUMAR DATTA

body2012
ORDER Pursuant to the direction of this Court, the Director General of Prosecution, Bihar is personally present in Court. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader No. 19, for the State. 3. The petitioner has approached this Court being aggrieved by the order dated 9.3.2011 passed by the Director General of Directorate of Prosecution by which it was held that the petitioner was not entitled to up to date interest upon the GPF amount rather he was entitled to interest accrued on the date of his dismissal, i.e., 16.7.1996 (Annexure-6). 4. The petitioner was dismissed from service by order dated 16.7.1996 after a departmental proceeding. The petitioner challenged the said order by filing CWJC No. 8207/1996 which was allowed by judgment and order dated 27.9.2007 and the order dated 16.7.1996 was quashed granting all consequential benefits to the petitioner. Aggrieved by the same the respondents filed LPA No. 160/2008 in which by order dated 22.7.2008 the order dated 27.9.2007 passed in the writ application was stayed. The petitioner after attaining the age of 60 years on 31.7.2008 applied for release of his GPF amount on 6.8.2008. At first a draft of Rs. 3,03,048/- in terms of the order dated 16.2.2009 of the State Government in the Home (Police) Department was issued and the petitioner was informed about the same but subsequently a fresh draft of Rs. 1, 03,304/- was issued. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed CWJC No. 20285/2010 for payment of GPF amount with up to date interest in terms of the first order. By order dated 15.12.2010 the writ application was disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to file a representation before the Director General of Prosecution who shall pass a speaking order thereon and make payment pursuant to the same. The impugned order dated 9.3.2011 was passed in which the claim of the petitioner for statutory interest has been rejected on the ground that the Letters Patent Appeal is pending against the order of the learned Single Judge quashing the dismissal order and thus the statutory interest shall be paid only till the date of dismissal and if the order of the writ application is upheld the payment of statutory interest will be made till the date of retirement. 5. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner would be entitled to statutory interest so long as the GPF amount deposited in his account is kept by the respondent-authorities and the statutory interest on the said amount cannot be denied if the amount itself is not being handed over to the petitioner. It is submitted that the question of payment of statutory interest being dependent upon the order passed in the LPA is of no relevance at all. The only consequence that may flow from the order passed in the LPA is that if the petitioner succeeds and direction is issued for consequential payment of his salary for the entire period, then he may again be entitled for the interest on GPF amount on those deductions. So far as the deductions already made are concerned, the respondents ought to pay the statutory interest till the date of payment. 6. On a consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case, I find sufficient force in the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner. So far as the deposits made by the petitioner in his GPF account are concerned, the same having been retained by the State till date, there can be no question of the petitioner being denied the statutory interest on those amounts. The amounts which have been deducted from the salary of the petitioner and deposited in the GPF account must continue to earn statutory interest until the payment is made. 7. This Court is also in agreement with the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner that the pendency of the Letters Patent Appeal and the stay of the order passed in the writ application can be of no consequence at all in the matter so far as the payment of current GPF amount with statutory interest till the date of payment are concerned. 8. In the aforesaid view of the matter, the writ application is allowed and it is directed that the respondents shall pay to the petitioner the amount of GPF lying to his credit as on the date of dismissal with statutory interest for the entire period till the date of payment. Let the said payment be made within a period of two months from today. 9. The personal appearance of the Director General of Prosecution is dispensed with.