Rakesh Kumar v. State Of Haryana & ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CWP-25852-2015 Date of Decision: 21.12.2015 Dr. Rakesh Kumar ---Petitioner Vs.

State of Haryana and others -------Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARINDER SINGH SIDHU --

Present:

Mr. Sandeep Goyat, Advocate for the petitioner.

*** HARINDER SINGH SIDHU, J.

The petitioner was earlier appointed as an Agricultural Development Officer (ADO) in Agriculture Department, Government of Haryana on 30.08.1994. Thereafter, he was appointed as District Extension Specialist (DES), Department of Plant Pathology, in CCS HAU, Hisar through proper channel on 11.3.2011. He was considered eligible for counting his past service towards old non-contributory pension scheme vide memo dated 13.3.2013 and thereafter he applied for transfer of his GPF balance from the office of Accountant General, Haryana to the office of Controller, CCS HAU.

Respondent No.3 transferred the GPF Balance vide reference dated 14.6.2013 but the interest was paid only upto March, 2011.

Dinesh Kumar 2015.12.25 13:21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document show signature

CWP-25852-2015 -2Learned counsel for the petitioner states that instead of granting interest on delayed payment of General Provident Fund (GPF) from April 2011 to June 2013 vide letter dated 21.10.2014 the petitioner was asked to take up the matter with the Government. Thereafter, the matter had been forwarded by respondent No.4 to respondent No.5. The matter has rested there and no decision has been taken. The petitioner thereafter again represented vide representation dated 3.12.2014(Annexure P-6) but again to no avail. Learned counsel states that in similar circumstances interest on delayed payment has been granted to one Shri Dharamveer (Annexure P-7), then it is not understandable why similar decision has not been taken in his case. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that at this stage he would be satisfied if a direction is issued to respondent No.4 to take a decision on the claim of the petitioner as contained in Annexure P-6 in the light of the precedent of Mr. Dharamveer's case (Annexure P-7).

Without commenting on the merits of the case, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No.4 to take a decision on the claim of the petitioner in the light of the precedent of Mr. Dharamveer's case, expeditiously, preferably within a period of three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. (Harinder Singh Sidhu) 21.12.2015 Judge dinesh Dinesh Kumar 2015.12.25 13:21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document show signature