Mrs. Kirti Sharma vs Punjab National Bank And Anr.
2013 Latest Caselaw 1803 Del

*     IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI


+                         WP(C) No.3584/2012

%                                                           April 22, 2013

MRS. KIRTI SHARMA                                         ..... Petitioner
                          Through:       Mr. Harish Sharma, Advocate.

                          versus

PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK AND ANR.               ..... Respondents

Through: Mr. Jagat Arora, Advocate.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J. MEHTA

To be referred to the Reporter or not?

VALMIKI J. MEHTA, J (ORAL)

1. This writ petition is filed by Mrs. Kirti Sharma seeking

directions against the respondent No.1/bank/employer for granting to her the

due pensionary benefits w.e.f 1.10.2010.

2. The facts of the case are that the petitioner was an employee of

the respondent No.1 and was working as Special Assistant with the

respondent No.1. Her ordinary date of superannuation was 30.9.2010. The

respondent No.1/bank introduced the second pension option for an existing

WP(C) No.3584 /2012 1 of 5 pension scheme and the last date for exercising the option was 25.10.2010.

Petitioner admittedly exercised this option within time on 26.8.2010.

3. Since the petitioner exercised the option within time, the

Manager of the bank directed retaining back of the amount payable to the

petitioner towards provident fund, gratuity etc and which becomes clear

from the letter of the bank dated 18.9.2010, which reads as under:-

     " Ref:                     Date: 18.09.2010

     To
     The Chief Manager,
     PF & Pension Fund Deptt.
     HO Rajender Bhawan
     Rajender Place
     New Delhi.

     Reg:     Another pension option for existing employee

We are enclosing herewith pension option on behalf of captioned employee and forwarding two copies of original pension option letter to circle office out of four copies duly signed by her/him & counter sign by me. One copy will be kept in her/his personal file and another copy will be handed over to the employee as token of having received the same also received opt. and 2.8 times amount kept in sundry A/c.

     List of employees PF No.

     1. Smt. Kirti Sharma             25184
     2. Sh. Hari Om Garg              71466
     3. Sh. B.D. Agrawal              32816
     4. Smt. Sashi Khanna             26617
     5. Smt. Namatter Kaur            39076
     6. Sh. Shiv Dayal Arya           73520
                                                   Sr. Manager"
WP(C) No.3584 /2012                                               2 of 5

4. Most surprisingly however the respondent No.1 instead of

paying pension to the petitioner, credited the amount of gratuity and

provident fund in petitioner's saving bank account on 1.10.2010. There was

no reason to credit the amount of provident fund of Rs.18,39,138.48/-

because the petitioner was in fact claiming pension in terms of the option

letter dated 26.8.2010. Petitioner thereafter at no point of time ever

withdrew this amount of provident fund credited to her account, and in fact

she put the provident fund amount in a fixed deposit with the respondent

No.1-bank itself on 5.1.2011. In fact, the FDR is created in favour of

respondent No.1 because the petitioner maintained her savings bank account

with the respondent No.1/employer.

5. On behalf of respondent No.1, all the aforesaid facts could not

be disputed with respect to date of superannuation of the petitioner, the

petitioner having within time exercised the option, in spite of above the

respondent No.1 having credited the provident fund amount in petitioner's

saving bank account, and finally the petitioner having thereafter not

withdrawn the amount but in fact having put the said amount of provident

fund in a fixed deposit on 5.1.2011.

6. I fail to understand that how the respondent No.1 can take

WP(C) No.3584 /2012 3 of 5 advantage of its own ill informed action of crediting the provident fund

amount in the petitioner's account because admittedly the petitioner had

already exercised the option of pension and therefore there was no need to

credit the provident fund amount on 1.10.2010. Mistake of the respondent

No.1/bank cannot lead to prejudice to the petitioner inasmuch as the

petitioner did not ask for crediting of the amount in her account.

7. Counsel for the petitioner on instructions states that the

respondent No.1 can not only take back the original principal amount of

provident fund, namely 9,18,569.24/- as credited on 1.10.2010, but the

respondent No.1 can even take interest which has accrued on the said

amount which was put in a fixed deposit on 5.1.2011 with the Palwal Branch

of the respondent No.1. Counsel for the petitioner however rightly argues

that the petitioner should be given the arrears of pension alongwith interest

on account of delay caused by the respondent No.1 in paying the pensionary

benefits to the petitioner.

8. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed. Petitioner will be

treated as a pension optee in terms of her letter dated 26.8.2010. Respondent

No.1 can appropriate the amount of Rs.9,18,569.24 alongwith interest

accrued thereon from 5.1.2011 and the petitioner will be paid her

WP(C) No.3584 /2012 4 of 5 pensionary benefits payable w.e.f 1.10.2010 alongwith interest @ 12% per

annum simple till this amount is credited in the savings bank account of the

petitioner. Petitioner will be entitled to further pension every month w.e.f

today in accordance with the rules. Petitioner is also granted costs of

Rs.10,000/-.

                                            VALMIKI J. MEHTA, J
APRIL 22, 2013
Ne




WP(C) No.3584 /2012                                              5 of 5