Sidheshwar Prasad Singh vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 18 November, 2011

0
29
Patna High Court – Orders
Sidheshwar Prasad Singh vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 18 November, 2011
                         IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                             Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.11589 of 2008
               Sidheshwar Prasad Singh, Son of Late Chandrika Singh, Resident of
               Village - Goberhi, P.S. - Daudpur, District - Saran, at present residing at
               Nirmal Nilayan, Chaitanya Nagar Narayanpur, Main Road, Gudari
               Chapra, Saran.
                                                              .............. Petitioner
                                                   Versus
               1. The State Of Bihar through the Registrar, Cooperative Societies,
                   Bihar, Patna.
               2. Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Bihar, Patna.
               3. The Bihar State Cooperative Land Development Ltd. Budh Marg,
                   Patna through its Chairman.
               4. The Chairman, Bihar State Cooperative Land Development Bank
                   Ltd., Budh Margh, Patna.
               5. The Managing Director the Bihar State Cooperative Land
                   Development Bank Ltd, Budh Marg, Patna.
                                                               ........... Respondents
                                      ----------------------------------

3 18.11.2011 Heard Sri Birendra Prasad, learned counsel for the

petitioner, Sri Vindhyachal Rai, learned A.C. to Government

Advocate No. 8, who appears on behalf of respondent no. 1 to 3 and

Sri Rajesh Prasad Chaudhary, learned counsel appearing on behalf

of respondent no. 4 to 5/Bihar State Co-operative Land

Development Bank Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Bank’).

The petitioner had tendered voluntary retirement

pursuant to advertisement made by the Bank which was published in

the local newspaper ‘Dainik Jagran’ on 3.01.2004. The application

for voluntary retirement was accepted by the Managing Director of

the Bank vide Memo No. 2793 dated 22.09.2006 with effect from

31.08.2006. Though voluntary retirement of the petitioner was

accepted dues of the petitioner was not cleared by the Bank

constraining the petitioner to approach this court by filing the

present writ petition. The writ petition was filed in the year 2008.

The petitioner in the writ petition has brought on record an office
2

order issued by the Bank whereby arrear of salary of the petitioner

to the tune of Rs. 59,525/- was sanctioned on 20.12.2007 vide

‘Annexure -4’ to the writ petition. The petitioner was not paid either

his arrear of salary nor the amount of gratuity and leave encashment.

Only payment of amount under the heads of group insurance and

provident fund was made to the petitioner. However, during the

pendency of the writ petition the respondent/Bank has paid the

amount of gratuity and leave encashment on 26.08.2009 which has

been stated by the petitioner in its reply to the counter affidavit filed

by the Bank.

Sri Rajesh Prasad Chaudhary, learned counsel for the

respondent/Bank does not dispute the claim of the petitioner but

submits that in the Bank retiral dues are being paid in chronological

manner. It was submitted that arrear of salary of the petitioner shall

be paid as per petitioner’s turn. The respondent/Bank has also filed

counter affidavit wherein claim of the petitioner has not been

disputed. Only it was disputed that the petitioner was not entitled to

get special package in terms of advertisement of 2004.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has candidly

submitted that the petitioner is not claiming for such relief. Only

dues which is outstanding presently is the amount of arrear of salary

which has been accepted by the respondent/Bank and now the

petitioner is entitled to claim interest on amount of gratuity from the

date of acceptance of his voluntary retirement till the date of

payment of the same i.e. from 31.08.2006 to 26.08.2009. Regarding
3

the plea of the Bank that payment will be made in chronological

manner, learned counsel for the petitioner has brought on record an

order passed by this court claiming retiral dues by one Sachida

Nand Singh vide CWJC No. 13656 of 2007. In the said writ petition

the plea of payment in chronological manner was considered by this

court and thereafter this court had directed to pay the dues of the

said petitioner.

The issue which is being raised by learned counsel for

the Bank has already been set at rest by this court and as such it

does not require reiteration. The court is of the opinion that once

gratuity amount was sanctioned and payment was delayed, the

petitioner is entitled to get interest on the amount of gratuity from

the date of its claim till the date of payment. Accordingly, the

respondent/Bank is directed to pay simple interest at the rate of 5%

per annum on the amount of gratuity. The gratuity is to be

calculated from 31.08.2006 to 26.08.2009. Similarly the petitioner is

also entitled to get the amount of undisputed arrear of salary i.e. Rs.

59,525/-. All payments i.e. amount of interest on gratuity amount

and due salary as indicated must be paid to the petitioner within

eight weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this

order.

The writ petition stands allowed.

Praful                             ( Rakesh Kumar, J.)
 

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here