Karnataka High Court
Sri. Shankaragouda S/O ... vs The President on 7 December, 2023
Bench: Chief Justice, Krishna S.Dixit
-1-
NC: 2023:KHC-D:14314-DB
WA No. 100420 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2023
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. PRASANNA B VARALE, CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNA S.DIXIT
WRIT APPEAL NO. 100420 OF 2023 (S-R)
BETWEEN:
SRI. SHANKARAGOUDA,
S/O. HANUMANTHGOUDA PATIL,
AGE. 65 YEARS, OCC. PENSIONER,
R/O. DOOR NO. 60/136, 2ND MAIN,
3RD CROSS, MMH LAYOUT,
OPP. U.A.S, SHREE GURU KRUPA NAGAR,
DHARWAD, DIST. DHARWAD-580005.
- APPELLANT
(BY SRI. M.S. HARAVI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE PRESIDENT,
RON TALUKA SHIKSHANA,
SAMITI [R] RON, DIST. GADAG 582209.
2. THE SECRETARY,
Digitally RON TALUKA SHIKSHANA,
signed by
VINAYAKA V
VINAYAKA B
SAMITI [R] RON, DIST. GADAG 582209.
BV Date:
2023.12.11
11:46:40
+0530
3. THE HEAD MASTER,
V.F. PATIL HIGH SCHOOL RON,
TQ. RON, DIST. GADAG 582209.
4. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR
OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS, GADAG,
DIST. GADAG 582101.
5. THE BLOCK EDUCATION OFFICER,
RON TALUK, RON, DIST. GADAG 582209.
- RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. H.R. DESHPANDE, ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R3,
SRI G.K. HIREGOUDAR, GOVT. ADVOCATE FOR R4 & R5)
-2-
NC: 2023:KHC-D:14314-DB
WA No. 100420 of 2023
THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S.4 OF KARNATAKA HIGH
COURT ACT, 1961, PRAYING THIS HON'BLE COURT TO, SET-ASIDE
THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE IN
W.P.NO.101192/2022 DATED 04.07.2023& ETC.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS
DAY, PRASANNA B.VARALE J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
This intra court appeal calls in question the learned
Single Judge's order dated 04.07.2023 in W.P. No.
101192/2022 whereby the request of the appellant-retiree
for the payment of interest on the delayed settment of
terminal benefits has been negatived.
2. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant submits
that it has been a settled position of law that the terminal
benefits in general and the pension in particular have to be
paid soon after retirement and therefore the impugned
order of the learned Single Judge which denies interest
needs to be voided on this ground alone.
NC: 2023:KHC-D:14314-DB
3. Learned Advocate appearing for the respondent
makes submission opposing the appeal and in justification
of the reasoning of the impugned order.
4. Having heard the counsel for the parties and having
perused the appeal papers, we are broadly of the view
that the right to pension is not a bounty vide D.S. Nakara
& Others Vs. Union of India1 and therefore for delayed
payment of pension interest is to be paid so that the
retiree would use the same in the evening of his life in as
much as, no fault is attributable to the employee.
5. In the above circumstance this appeal succeeds;
Impugned order is set at naught; The writ petition having
been allowed a writ of mandamus issues to the
respondents to pay to the appellant interest at the rate of
9% p.a. for the delayed payment of terminal benefits/
pension. This to be done within a period of three months
(1983) 1 SCC 305
NC: 2023:KHC-D:14314-DB
and report of compliance be filed with the Registrar
General of this Court.
Now, no costs.
Sd/-
CHIEF JUSTICE
Sd/-
JUDGE
BVV
