High Court Karnataka High Court

Gundegowda S/O Rangegowda vs State Of Karnataka on 23 November, 2009

Karnataka High Court
Gundegowda S/O Rangegowda vs State Of Karnataka on 23 November, 2009
Author: Ram Mohan Reddy
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE

DATED THIS THE 23*" DAY OF NOVEMBER 2009

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAM  A' 

WRIT PETITION No.252o4 OF 2009  ._ 3

BETWEEN

GUNDEGOWDA

S/O. RANGEGOWDA

AGE 66 YEARS  -

RETIRED MUNICIPAL EMPLOY'EE3~.__ 

NOW R/AT KENCHANAYAKANA HALLI' - 

VELLAGE, SHANTHI ORAMA HO;E':.I   A' 'A 

HASSAN TALUK & DISTRICT.  A  * .  .,'_;. PETITIONER

(BY M /s. NAG ;'xg$--, K  NA1v1ENT DEPARTMENT
_ "V1D3:1ANA_ SOUDHA

   f  "1?}iAi'z3:iREcTOR OF MUNICIPAL

A 'ADMINI'STRATOR,
WSRWESHWARAIAH CENTRE
  FLOOR, VXDHANA VEEDI
.. BANGALORE m1.

V'   WE CONTROLLER

STATE ACCOUNTS
CAVERY BHAVAN, BANGALORE.



2

4 THE ASSISTANT CONTROLLER
LOCAL AUDIT CIRCLE, HASSAN.

5 THE COMMISSIONER
CITY MUNICIPAL COUNCIL, HASSAN. V. 
 RESFONDENTS

(BY SMT. M C NAGASHREE, HCGP FOR R14) _.  '
{BY SR1. D C JAGADEESH, ADV FOR R5) ' '

THIS PETITION FILED UNDiER»T»ARTICLE"'i;é,:2,a"&i.227 it

OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA P.RAYINCf (IO '»I:>I_RECT
THE R2 To R5 TO DISBURSE THE'*INTEREsT-- ON_DEI_IAyfED

PENSIONARY BENEFITS ASPEJR AN.N--B DATE.D_13.9L;I994"<,
AND AS PER REVISED RATE__O._If INTEREST ~ASr._PER "LAW,"

WITH IN THE TIME FIXED 'BI?' THIS"~-HONBLE COURT
AWARD COSTOE THIS W.P.     

THIS PETITION ORDERS, THIS
DAY, THE COURT Ix/IADEV_fI-HE .FOI,LOwIN;o_ 

{The  discharging duties of Octroi
Matsadi;"'yvaS  as a Bill Collector in the 5th

resfiyondent Q  Municipal Council and on attaining

» theVage'«.of_S'uperannuation, retired from service on 30-

  5*" respondent processed the pension

I paifierélanel forwarded the same to the 4″‘ respondent –

V’ Assistant Controller, Local Audit Circle, Hassan, on 1-

V’12-2001. Nevertheless, pension was paid to the

3

petitioner during the period from 31-05-2005 to 46-
2006, in the following manner-

Sl.No. Date Amount _ p
1 31.5.2005 88,568g_00V

27.9.2005 __1,01_–;4″i5i§00V””: .
27.9.2005
27.9.2005 1,025.~00* 00 .0
27.9.2005if…’
17.4_.2005VA.-7}.. 50;709:Od
” ‘i2..p552.–00

V 04.5.V2H0fQS _., “29581-00

4>-OJIO

. 4.07.793-00
paid on the sum for the
delajyeri pauv1nvent.,° heirloe this Writ petition.

it Pension a bounty payable at the sweet

1 of the Government and that, on the

other the right to pension is a valuable right

vesting’ “in the Government servant. The right of the

“‘.pe’tit:ioner to receive pension is property under Article

N

21.52005 1.28,65§¥-09 ”

4

31(1) of the Constitution of India and the State, has no
power to either withhold or cause delay in the payment.

Similarly, the said claim is also property underfxrticie

19(1)(i) and it is not saved by sub~artic1e

19. Therefore, it is the fundamental.’v:Ai’ig11£.:..oAi*the

petitioner under Article 19(1;:j(fl

Constitution to receive pension. is.v–th.e’ iaw} 1ai.d.”g

down by a five judges of the :i§Xpex’:’:§C1ourt in
DEOKINANDAN pmisitn -‘first. or BIHAR

AND OTHERS1, i

In sii1ii.1«.ar’wcii’5:timsta;nces, though not identical,
where there was a’ of four years in payment of the

peiisioiiaiy herietitsvito an employee of the State, the

it the case of VIJAY L. MEHROTRA vs.

STATE AND OTHERS? directed payment of

interest at “the rate of 18% p.a. from the date of

it V’ .. ret-iijerrient till payment.

__’5AiR1971 sc 1409
i(2em)9 sec 687

5

4. In the light of the fact that the 531 respondent

forwarded all the pension papers of the petitioneif”.._on

1-12-2001, evident from the letter dated;§i;7}{i”V1.i’f’i’?,O0.E§

Annexure-“D” addressed to _t_he__pDepnty:’.’;viiegistra1j,’AV’

Karnataka Lokayukta, the failure tthe:i’part:nofV

respondent to disburse the_:”pensionary_’t§enefits…to the

petitioner immediately tr-etirernent 30-11-
2001, has entitled the interest. It is
noticed that _ pension’ eommencing
from 4~s~200s, totaling to
””_petitioner was entitled to
within’-at retirement. Respondent

aut?norities= having faidled to pay the pension, within a

” re’asonabi’e. time” “” “after retirement and not shown

the delay in payment, the petitioner is

en-titted interest on the delayed payment at the rate of

i8% simple from 30-11-2001 upto 4~5»2006.

is”-K

6

5. In the resuit, the writ petition is allowed.

Respondents are directed to pay simple interest.VV2_:1t:1.8°/ca

p.a. on Rs.4,07,793/– from 30–11-2001

the date of payment.

KS