Delhi High Court
Ram Chameli vs The Sr. Divisional Finance ... on 2 August, 2019
$~23
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of decision: 2nd August, 2019
+ W.P.(C) 7748/2019 and CM APPL. 32176/2019
RAM CHAMELI ..... Petitioner
Through Mr. Naveen R. Nath, Mr. Rahul Jain
and Mr. Siddarth Agarwal, Advs.
from DHCLSC
versus
THE SR. DIVISIONAL FINANCE MANAGER
AND ANR. ..... Respondents
Through Mr. Jagjit Singh and Mr. Preet Singh,
Advs. for R-1
Mr. R.S. Raju, Mr. Suman Kukrety
with Mr. Amit Babbar, Chief
Manager, Mayapuri Branch,
Syndicate Bank, R-2
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KUMAR KAIT
J U D G M E N T (ORAL)
1. Vide the present petition, the petitioner seeks direction to the
Respondents to release the family pension that the Petitioner is entitled to
from November, 2017 till date and for a further directions to the Respondent
No.1 to issue appropriate instruction to Respondent No.2 to continue paying
family pension at rates specified by law during her life time. She further
seeks directions thereby directing the respondents to jointly to pay interest
18% p.a. on the entire withheld amounts till actual payment. She also prays
for directions to the respondent No. 2 Bank to pay an amount of ₹2 lakhs as
compensation to the petitioner for wilfully violating the petitioner's right to
pension under Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India for subjecting
the Petitioner to deprivation while being aware that the frugal pension
receivable by the Petitioner was a matter of her fundamental and statutory
right.
2. The petitioner is a 86 year old widow of late Sh. Mehar Chand Katar,
who was working with Delhi Division of Northern Railway, retired on
24.07.1980 and died on 26.08.1991. On the death of Late Shri Mehar Chand
Katar, instructions were given to Syndicate Bank, Mayapuri Branch (Bank)
to credit the family pension through the Pension Payment Order No.
0280663 (PRO) issued by the Northern Railways. The Petitioner started
receiving regular family pension in her account from Northern Railways
which was credited/paid through the Bank, ever since the death of her
husband.
3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that all
of a sudden, the Respondent No.2 Bank stopped crediting the family pension
in Petitioner's account from November 2017 and the reason given was that
the Bank had lost/misplaced the original Pension Payment Order [PPO]
during shifting of its old records internally. The Respondent Bank has since
been continuously insisting that the petitioner should produce a duplicate of
the original PPO issued by the Northern Railways after the death of Late
Shri Mehar Chand Katar. The Petitioner was never in receipt of the PPO
personally as this is a formal document given by Northern Railways to the
Bank for processing/crediting the family pension in the Petitioner's account.
However, the Petitioner has approached Respondent No.1 Northern
Railways as well as the Respondent No.2 Bank several times but to no avail.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that both the parties
acknowledged the petitioner's right to the family pension but due to non-
availability of PPO the same is not being paid to the Petitioner. Moreover, in
a letter dated September 2018, Sr. Divisional Finance Manager,
ADFM/Pension, Northern Railways, had instructed the Respondent No. 2
that the family pension be started at the earliest and that Northern Railways
will serve all claims raised by the Bank in this head. Still no family pension
is being credited in the Petitioner's account.
5. It is further submitted that the Petitioner being an old lady of 86 year
is facing immense financial hardship due to non-payment of family pension
since November 2017 for no fault of her as the pay order has been lost by
the Bank during their internal shifting of records.
6. Vide order dated 19.07.2019, this Court had directed that a Senior
Officer of respondent no.2/Syndicate Bank, Delhi Circle shall personally
remain present in Court on the next date of hearing with relevant records.
7. Pursuant thereto, Mr. Amit Babbar, Chief Manager of the respondent
No. 2 Bank, through Mr. R.S. Raju Advocate, appeared in the Court and
submits that the respondent No. 1 sent duplicate PPO to respondent
No.2/Bank and accordingly, this amount of ₹2,54,826/- has been credited in
the pension account of the petitioner. The said amount is towards the
pension upto the month of June, 2019 and the respondents had assured this
Court that the petitioner shall continue to receive regular pension.
8. The fact remains that because of the fault of the respondent No. 2
Bank, the petitioner suffered financial crisis as the pension amount has not
been transferred to the petitioner, who is a widow of 86 years old.
9. Accordingly, I hereby direct the respondent No. 2 Bank to pay interest
@7.5% per annum for delayed payment with effect from November, 2017
till July, 2019. The interest amount shall be credited in her account within
two weeks from today.
10. Due to the inaction and negligence on the part of the respondents, the
petitioner was compelled to file the present petition and since she did not
have sufficient amount to engage counsel to present her case, therefore, Mr.
Naveen Nath Advocate was appointed as legal aid counsel. Accordingly, the
respondents are directed to pay an amount of ₹50,000/- each as costs in
favour of the petitioner. The costs amount shall also be credited in the
pension account of the petitioner within two weeks from the receipt of this
order.
11. The present writ petition is accordingly allowed and disposed of with
the above directions.
12. Pending application also stands disposed of.
(SURESH KUMAR KAIT)
JUDGE
August 02, 2019
PB
