← Library
Madras High CourtWP/17844/2014disposed of

S.Swaminathan, v. The Chief Executive Officer,

2021-03-29Honourable Mr Justice R. Mahadevan3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 29.03.2021

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.MAHADEVAN W.P.No.17844 of 2014 S.Swaminathan ... Petitioner Vs The Chief Executive Officer, Tamil Nadu Khadi and Village Industries Board, Kuralagam, Chennai - 600 108.

... Respondent Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing to pay the interest due on the retiral benefits paid to the petitioner in pursuance to the order passed in W.P.No.16723/2011 dated 14.03.2012 within a stipulated time limit.

For Petitioner : M/s.Malarvizhi Udayakumar For Respondent : Mr.S.K.Bose

ORDER

The relief sought for in this writ petition is to direct the respondent to pay interest on the retiral benefits paid to the petitioner belatedly in pursuance of the order of this Court dated 14.03.2012 passed in W.P.No.16723/2011 within a time limit to be stipulated by this Court.

2.According to the petitioner, while he was working as Assistant Director/Assistant Project Officer (Industries), District Rural Development Agency, Theni, he was placed under suspension on 27.05.1998, due to his involvement in a criminal case; and he reached the age of superannuation on 31.05.1998, however, he was not permitted to retire from service, due to pendency of the criminal case. Hence, he filed a writ petition in W.P.No.16723 of 2011, which, by order dated 14.03.2012, was allowed in the following terms:

"8.In view of the above, the writ petition is allowed, the impugned orders are set aside and the respondents are directed to settle all

terminal benefits to the petitioner, with applicable interest as per the Rules, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. However, the order passed herein shall not prejudice the case of the prosecution in the criminal court. There shall be no order as to costs."

Pursuant to the aforesaid order, the respondent vide proceedings dated 22.08.2012, sanctioned terminal benefits payable to the petitioner, but not paid interest towards the belated payment, as directed by this Court. Hence, this writ petition. 3.Heard both sides and perused the materials placed before this Court.

4.In this writ petition, the petitioner sought interest for the belated payment of retiral benefits due to him. 5.On an earlier occasion, this Court by order dated 14.03.2012 passed in WP.No.16723 of 2011, allowed the said writ petition filed by the petitioner challenging the order of suspension and the order not permitting him to retire from service. While doing so, this Court has directed the respondent to settle all the terminal benefits to the petitioner with applicable interest as per the Rules. However, the respondent has disbursed the terminal benefits, without any interest, which in the opinion of this Court, would amount to contempt of court. 6.It is settled law that the pension is a valuable right of a Government servant and the same cannot be treated as a bounty to be handed out by the respondents at their whims.

If such payment is delayed, he would be entitled to get some interest for the same. In the decision of the Supreme Court in S.K.Dua v. State of Haryana and others [MANU/SC/7048/2008 : 2008 (3) SCC 44], it was held as follows:- "14. In the circumstances, prima facie, we are of the view that the grievance voiced by the appellant appears to be well founded that he would be entitled to interest on such benefits. If there are statutory rules occupying the field, the appellant could claim payment of interest relying on such rules.

If there are administrative instructions, guidelines, or norms prescribed for the purpose, the appellant may claim benefit of interest on that basis. But even in absence of statutory rules, administrative instructions or guidelines, an employee can

claim interest under part III of the Constitution relying on Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution. The submission of the learned counsel for the appellant that retiral benefits are not in the nature of 'bounty' is, in our opinion, well founded and needs no authority in support thereof."

7.Applying the aforesaid ratio decidendi, this Court, in the given facts and circumstances of the case, is inclined to direct the respondent to pay interest at applicable rate, for the belated payment of terminal benefits to the petitioner. Accordingly, this writ petition stands disposed of. The respondent shall complete the said exercise within a period of eight (8) weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. No costs.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS VII) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar mtl To The Chief Executive Officer, Tamil Nadu Khadi and Village Industries Board, Kuralagam, Chennai - 600 108.

+1cc to M/s.Malarvizhi Udayakumar, Advocate, S.R.No.20993 W.P.No.17844 of 2014 SKY(CO) HS(15/07/2021)