Patna High Court
Ramapati Kumari vs The State Of Bihar on 11 December, 2023
Author: Harish Kumar
Bench: Harish Kumar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.208 of 2021
======================================================
Ramapati Kumari, Wife of Late Surendra Prasad Singh, Resident of Village-
Ghatakan, P.O.- Dhangawan Police Station- Kako, District- Jehanabad.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Addl. Chief Secretary, Department of
Education, Government of Bihar, Patna.
2. The Director, Primary Education Department Bihar, Patna.
3. The District Education Officer, Jehanabad.
4. The District Proframme Officer, (Estab), Jehanabad.
5. The Treasury Officer, Jehanabad.
6. The Assistant General Manager, Centralised Pension Processing Centre,
State Bank of India, 4th Floor Administrative Office, Judges Court Road
Patna-800001.
7. The Branch Manager, State Bank of India, Hajipur Branch (08313) District-
Jehanabad.
8. The Accountant General, Bihar, Patna.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Binod Kumar, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Nishant Kumar Jha, AC to SC-28
For the S.B.I. : Mr. Sanjiv Kumar, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 11-12-2023
Heard Mr. Binod Kumar, learned counsel for the
petitioner, Mr. Nishant Kumar Jha, learned counsel for the State
and Mr. Sanjiv Kumar, learned counsel for the State Bank of
India.
2. The petitioner, who superannuated on 30.09.2014
from the post of Assistant Teacher, Government Primary School,
Ghatakan, Kako in the district of Jehanabad, filed the present
Patna High Court CWJC No.208 of 2021 dt.11-12-2023
2/5
writ petition seeking a direction upon the respondents to ensure
payment of her entire amount of gratuity along with admissible
interest over the delayed payment thereof.
3. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that
despite having been retired from the post of Assistant Teacher
on 30.09.2014, the gratuity amount of the petitioner has been
withheld for want of "No Dues Certificate". It is further
submitted that on the verge of retirement, while the petitioner
was working as incharge Headmistress of Government Primary
School, Ghatakan, some amount was allocated to her for
construction work of school boundary, however, in the
meantime, the petitioner superannuated, thus the District
Programme Officer, Sarv Shiksha Abhiyan, Jehanabad vide its
letter, as contained in Memo no. 1042, dated 11.05.2016
directed the petitioner to deposit Rs.42,941/-. Pursuant thereto,
the petitioner has submitted a Bank draft of Rs.42,941/- vide
draft no. 545044 dated 16.05.2016. Irrespective of the due
amount returned to the District Programme Officer, Sarv
Shiksha Abhiyan, Jehanabad, the petitioner has not been
allowed the gratuity amount and lastly the District Programme
Officer (Establishment), Jehanabad sent letter no.2037 dated
10.10.2018
to the Treasury Officer, Jehanabad with all requisite
Patna High Court CWJC No.208 of 2021 dt.11-12-2023
papers for payment of gratuity amount with GPO No.
201511101085GO. He further submits that on receipt of the
requisite papers, the Senior Treasury Officer, Jehanabad vide
Memo No. 934 dated 01.11.2018 has forwarded the letter to the
Manager, State Bank of India, Jehanabad for payment of
gratuity amount.
4. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of
respondent Bank. Mr. Sanjiv Kumar, learned counsel for the
Bank referring to the averments made therein, submits that the
respondent Bank is a pension disbursing agency and credit the
amount of the pension and gratuity in the account of pensioner
only on the instructions given by the respective pension paying
authority.
5. It is further contended that the respondent Bank
has not received any original paper of the gratuity payment
order from the Treasury Officer and to this effect, time without
number, the respondent Bank made request to the Treasury
Officer, Jehanabad to send the original copy of the gratuity
payment order, but the same has not been done till October,
2021 and when the copy of the GPO was sent, payment has
been made.
6. At this juncture, learned counsel for the
Patna High Court CWJC No.208 of 2021 dt.11-12-2023
petitioner submitted that despite any laches or negligence on the
part of the petitioner, she was punished for her no fault for such
a long period of seven years from the date of her retirement and
finally during the pendency of the present writ petition she has
been accorded the amount of gratuity to the tune of
Rs.7,78,734/-. It is next submitted that from the entire episode
and the materials available on record, it is explicit that because
of indolent and apathetic attitude of the respondent State
authority as well as the Bank, the petitioner had been deprived
from her rightful admissible due amount. He, thus submits that
in any view of the matter, the petitioner cannot be deprived from
statutory interest over the delayed payment of gratuity, which
has been paid after a delay of more than seven years.
7. Considering the limited grievance of the
petitioner, this Court deems it proper to dispose of the writ
petition with a direction to the Director, Primary Education,
Bihar, Patna to consider the claim of the petitioner for interest
over the delayed payment of gratuity, as, prima facie, from the
record, this Court is of the opinion that because of the laches on
the part of the official respondents, the petitioner has been
deprived from her rightful claim of gratuity for such a long
period.
Patna High Court CWJC No.208 of 2021 dt.11-12-2023
8. It is needless to observe that the case of the
petitioner shall be considered in the light of the order/judgment
rendered by the Division Bench of this Court in the case of
Jahanvi Shankar Verma Vs. The Chairman Bihar State
Electricity Board & Ors., reported in 2003 (1) PLJR 254 and
in the case of The Vice Chancellor, Tilka Manjhi Bhagalpur
University & Ors. Vs. Dr. Hari Shankar Prasad Singh &
Another, reported in 2015 (3) PLJR 191.
9. The aforesaid exercise must be completed
preferably within a period of eight weeks from the date of
receipt of a copy of this order.
(Harish Kumar, J)
uday/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date 14.12.2023
Transmission Date NA
