Biharilal Yadav vs Principal Secretary The State Of Madhya ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 20375 MP

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Biharilal Yadav vs Principal Secretary The State Of Madhya ... on 4 December, 2023

Author: Vijay Kumar Shukla

Bench: Vijay Kumar Shukla

                                                             1
                                IN   THE      HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                    AT INDORE
                                                     BEFORE
                                     HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA
                                              ON THE 4 th OF DECEMBER, 2023
                                              WRIT PETITION No. 8995 of 2011

                           BETWEEN:-
                           BIHARILAL YADAV S/O GENDALAL YADAV, AGED
                           ABOUT        67      YEARS, KASBA    BODA
                           TEH.NARSINGHGHGARH DISTT.RAJGARH (MADHYA
                           PRADESH)

                                                                                          .....PETITIONER
                           (BY SHRI VIVEK DALAL - ADVOCATE)

                           AND
                           1.    PRINCIPAL SECRETARY THE STATE OF MADHYA
                                 PRADESH AND 3 ORS. GOVT. THRU.URBAN
                                 ADMINISTRATION     AND      DEVELOPMENT
                                 DEPARTMENT BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)

                           2.    COMMISSIONER URBAN ADMINISTRATION &
                                 DEVELOPMENT DEPTT. SHIVAJI NAGAR, NEAR 6
                                 NO. BUS STOP, DISTRICT BHOPAL (MADHYA
                                 PRADESH)

                           3.    CHIEF MUNICIPAL OFFICER NAGAR PANCHYAT
                                 BODA,DISTT.RAJGARH (MADHYA PRADESH)

                           4.    CHIEF MUNICIPAL OFFICER NAGAR PANCHAYAT
                                 KHUJNER DISTT.RJAGARH (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                        .....RESPONDENTS
                           (BY SHRI BHUWAN DESHMUKH - GA FOR RESPONDENT NO.1 AND 2)

                                 Th is petition coming on for hearing this day, th e court passed the
                           following:
                                                              ORDER

The petitioner is seeking a direction to the respondents to pay interest on the amount of gratuity and pension which is paid to the petitioner after 86

months i.e. upto December 2010 of its falling due (date of disbursement 5.1.2011, date of retirement 31st October, 2003).

2. Counsel for petitioner submits that petitioner is entitled for interest on the ground of delay on the part of the respondents in paying his pension and gratuity as per the law laid down by the division bench of this court in the case of I.P. Malik Vs. State of MP 2002(4) MPLJ 367 . There is no reply filed by the respondents.

3. In view of the aforesaid, the present petition is disposed off by directing the respondents to examine the claim of the petitioner regarding interest on pension and gratuity for 86 months in accordance with law taking

into consideration the judgment passed by the division bench in the case of I.P. Malik (supra). The petitioner shall file fresh representation along with the judgment passed by the division bench in the case of I.P. Malik (supra) and the respondents shall decide the said representation in accordance with law within a period of two months from the date of filing of the representation. It is made clear that if it is found that the delay was on the part of the respondents in making the payment of retiral dues to the petitioner, the petitioner shall be entitled for 6% interest on the delayed payment from the date of entitlement till the date of amount actually has been paid to the petitioner. The entire exercise shall be completed within a period of two months from the date of publication of the order.

4. With the aforesaid, writ petition is allowed and disposed off.

(VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA) JUDGE VM