Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Gulabrao Narayanrao Chandurkar (since deceased, represented by legal representatives), was employed as a driver in the State Government of Maharashtra from 15.06.1959. He suffered a major accident on 31.03.1982 and was subsequently posted as a Messenger on 17.11.1982 due to inability to perform driving duties. He worked as a Messenger until his retirement on 30.06.1987. Although his pay as a driver was protected, the respondents denied him fixation of pension and payment of gratuity on the post of driver, instead paying him provisional pension. The petitioner approached the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal, Nagpur Bench, which by order dated 22.06.1999 allowed Transfer Application No. 2 of 1998 (Writ Petition No. 3024 of 1990), directing the respondents to fix final pension and pay gratuity on the post of driver. However, the Tribunal rejected the claim for interest on the ground that the petitioner raised a dispute and his claim was denied by the respondents from time to time. The respondents did not challenge the Tribunal's order, which attained finality. The petitioner filed the present writ petition seeking interest on the delayed payment. The High Court observed that there was no reason for not fixing pension and paying gratuity on the post of driver, and the petitioner could not be blamed for the delay. The Court held that the petitioner is entitled to interest on the delayed payment of pension and gratuity from the date of retirement until actual payment, at the rate of 6% per annum. The writ petition was allowed, and the respondents were directed to pay interest within three months.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Pension and Gratuity - Interest on Delayed Payment - Maharashtra Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1982 - The petitioner, a driver who retired on 30.06.1987, was denied final pension and gratuity on the post of driver despite pay protection. The Tribunal directed fixation of pension and payment of gratuity but rejected interest, reasoning that the petitioner raised a dispute and his claim was denied. The High Court held that the petitioner could not be blamed for the delay and that the Tribunal's order had attained finality, thus the petitioner is entitled to interest on delayed payment. (Paras 1-5)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the petitioner is entitled to interest on delayed payment of pension and gratuity despite the Tribunal rejecting the claim on the ground that the petitioner raised a dispute and his claim was denied by the respondents.
Final Decision
The High Court allowed the writ petition, setting aside the Tribunal's order rejecting interest. The respondents were directed to pay interest on the delayed payment of pension and gratuity from the date of retirement (30.06.1987) until actual payment at the rate of 6% per annum within three months.
Law Points
- Interest on delayed payment of pension and gratuity
- entitlement to interest despite dispute
- finality of Tribunal order
- no fault of employee for delay
