Gulabrao Narayanrao Chandurkar vs State Of Mah. & Another
2017 Latest Caselaw 3069 Bom

                                                1             wp3463.00.odt

                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                         NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR

                          WRIT PETITION NO. 3463 OF 2000


            Gulabrao Narayanrao Chandurkar,
            (dead) through L.Rs.

 1A]        Smt. Shantabai wd/o Gulabrao
            Chandurkar, aged about 72 years,  
            Occ. Nil, R/o. Near Vikas Vidyalaya, 
            Vilas Nagar, Amravati, 
            Tq. And Distt.  Amravati

 1B]        Raju s/o Gulabrao Chandurkar, 
            aged about 59 years, Occ. Private Job,  
            R/o. Near Vikas Vidyalaya, Vilas Nagar, 
            Amravati, Tq. And Distt.  Amravati   ......                   PETITIONERS

                                ...VERSUS...

 1.         State of Maharashtra,
            Through its Secretary,
            Department of Information on
            Publicity, Mantralayta, Mumbai  

 2.      Divisional Deputy Director
         (Information), Govt. of Maharashtra,
         Amravati                                         ......       RESPONDENTS
 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Shri   J.S.Wankhede,   Advocate,   h/f   Shri   D.G.Patil,   Advocate,   for
 Petitioner.
 Shri V.P.Maldhure, AGP, for respondents 
 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                          CORAM: R. K. DESHPANDE, AND
                                        Mrs. SWAPNA JOSHI, JJ.

                          DATE    : 12      th   JUNE,  2017 .

 ORAL JUDGMENT (per Deshpande, J.)


            1]             The   Maharashtra   Administrative   Tribunal,



                                                   2              wp3463.00.odt

Nagpur Bench, allowed Transfer Application No. 2 of 1998

(Writ Petition No. 3024 of 1990) on 22.06.1999, directing the

respondents to fix final pension of the petitioner and to pay

gratuity on his retirement on the post of driver. The Tribunal

has, however, rejected the claim for interest. For denying the

relief of interest, the reason recorded is that the petitioner

raised a dispute and his claim was denied by the

respondents from time to time and therefore, he was not

entitled to interest.

2] The facts in brief are that the petitioner was

working as driver in the services of the State Government

with effect from 15.06.1959. He suffered major accident on

31.03.1982 and consequently being unable to perform the

said job of driver, he was given posting as Messenger on

17.11.1982. The petitioner worked on the said post till he

retired on 30.06.1987. Though his pay on the post of driver

was protected, he was denied the fixation of pension and

payment of gratuity on the post of driver. The petitioner was

paid provisional pension. Therefore, he approached the

Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal, Nagpur Bench.

                                                   3             wp3463.00.odt

          3]               The   decision   given   by   the   Maharashtra

Administrative Tribunal on 22.06.1999 has not been

challenged by the respondents. We do not find any reason

for not fixing the pension and payment of gratuity payable to

the petitioner on the post of Driver. We also do not find any

reason to pay the provisional pension instead of finalizing it.

The order passed by the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal

has attained the finality. The petitioner could not have been

blamed for denial of interest either on the final payment of

gratuity or payment of pension as per the order passed by

the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal, Nagpur Bench.

4] The petitioner was entitled to interest on the

amount of gratuity in terms of sub-section (3-A) of Section 7

of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 and for interest on the

pension as per the provisions of Rule 129-B of the

Maharashtra Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1982, from the

date on which the petitioner retired on 30.06.1987 till the final

payment of the pension and on the unpaid amount of

gratuity.

          5]               In view of above,   the petition is allowed.   The




                                                  4              wp3463.00.odt

respondents are directed to pay the petitioner interest in

terms of sub-section (3-A) of Section 7 of the Payment of

Gratuity Act from the date of his retirement on the amount of

gratuity ultimately paid to him as per the decision of the

Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal, Nagpur Bench. The

respondents are also further directed to pay to the petitioner

interest as stipulated under Rule 129-B of the Maharashtra

Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1982 on the unpaid amount

from the date of retirement till the payment of the amount as

per the decision of the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal,

Nagpur Bench.

Rule is made absolute in these terms. No order

as to cost.

                                       JUDGE                     JUDGE
 Rvjalit