Chander Prakash Kaushal vs Govt Of Nct Of Delhi And Ors
2013 Latest Caselaw 3785 Del

$~24
*      IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+      W.P.(C) 24/2010 & CM 44/2010(stay)
%                                                           27.08.2013

CHANDER PRAKASH KAUSHAL                 ..... Petitioner
                Through Mr. G. Tushar Rao, Mr. D.S.V.
                Krishnajee, Ms. Sushma, Advocates

                           versus

GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI AND ORS                   ..... Respondents

Through Ms. Sana Ansari, Advocate for Ms. Zubeda Begum, Advocate for respondent Nos. 1 &

Mr. Ajay Kumar Agarwal, Advocate for respondent No. 3.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA

To be referred to the Reporter or not?

VALMIKI J. MEHTA, J (ORAL)

1. By this petition, petitioner claims the relief of pension and interest on

delayed payment of pension. Pension in the meanwhile has already been

paid to the petitioner, and thus the issue remains only as regards to interest.

2. Interest is liable to be paid when there is unnecessary delay in

payment of the pension.

3. In the present case, the employer/institute is respondent No. 3-

M/s.Sarada Ukil School of Art. This is an aided educational institution to

W.P.(C) 24/2010 Page 1 the extent of 95% by the respondent No. 1-Govt. of NCT of Delhi and this

95% of funds are routed to the respondent No. 3-institute by the respondent

No. 1 through the respondent No. 2-Director of Education.

4. It is not disputed that petitioner was entitled to pension and petitioner

retired on 31.12.2004. Pension has been paid however much later in the

year 2010. The respondent No. 3-institute has stated that it could not deposit

its share of contribution towards the pension and the provident fund because

respondent Nos. 1 & 2 had to give a PAO account number in which such

amount had to be deposited. This PAO account number was not allotted till

the year 2010, and when so allotted, the amount was deposited by the

respondent No. 3 in the PAO account.

5. Grant-in-aid was given to the respondent No. 3 as per the letter of the

Lt. Governor dated 03.11.2003 which required fulfilment of the following

conditions by the respondent No. 3:

"a) Constitution of Management committee as per Grant-in- aid Rules.

(b) The Provident Fund contribution from the date of admittance to the Fund with interest thereon, i.e. employers share upto the date of switching over to the Rules, shall be credited to consolidated Fund of Delhi.

(c) The Management shall continue to contribute monthly at the rate of 5% of 8 1/3% of the pay as defined under the Rule 10 of Delhi School Education Act 1973 for those Sarda Ukil School of Art (SUSA) employees who will be governed by

W.P.(C) 24/2010 Page 2 these Rules and the same shall be credited to consolidated Fund of Delhi, towards pension and gratuity benefits as envisaged therein."

6. There is no issue so far as condition (a) of constitution of

Management Committee and the issue is only contribution by the

Management as per conditions (b) and (c) above. Respondent No. 3 had

informed the requirement of giving PAO account number to the respondent

Nos. 1 & 2 in terms of its letter dated 04.04.2006. Respondent Nos. 1 & 2,

however, did not give the necessary details till 2010, and when the same was

given, the necessary amount was deposited by the respondent No. 3.

Therefore, the delay from 01.01.2005 till 04.04.2006 or till the end of April

2006 would be of the respondent No. 3 and thereafter of the respondent No.

1.

7. In view of the fact that the pension of the petitioner was paid with

delay and this act of delay has caused loss of interest to the petitioner,

petitioner is held entitled to interest @ 8% per annum simple from

01.01.2005 till the date of payment of the pension. Liability towards interest

to be paid to the petitioner will be shared inter se by the respondent No. 3

and the respondent No. 1. Respondent No. 1 will be liable to pay interest till

31.04.2006 and thereafter till the actual date of payment of pension, interest

W.P.(C) 24/2010 Page 3 liability will be in the proportion of 5% by respondent No. 3 and 95% by

respondent No. 1.

8. In view of the above, the amount payable as interest in terms of this

judgment be paid to the petitioner within a period of eight weeks from

today. If the amount is not paid within eight weeks from today, petitioner

on the accumulated amount will be entitled to further interest @ 8% per

annum simple.

9. Writ petition is allowed and disposed in terms of the above

observations. CM 44/2010 also stands disposed of accordingly. Parties are

left to bear their own costs.

                                           VALMIKI J. MEHTA, J
AUGUST 27, 2013
godara




W.P.(C) 24/2010                                                      Page 4