Patna High Court
Meena Devi vs The State Of Bihar on 2 February, 2024
Author: Harish Kumar
Bench: Harish Kumar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.9362 of 2020
======================================================
Meena Devi wife of Late Ajit Prasad resident of Mohalla Chandni Chowk
(Sudha Computer), P.S. Sheikhpura, District Sheikhpura.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Education Department,
Bihar, Patna.
2. The Principal Secretary, Education Department, Bihar, Patna.
3. The Director, Primary Education, Bihar, Patna.
4. The Director, Provident Fund Directorate, Bihar, Patna.
5. The Commissioner, Munger Division, Munger.
6. The District Magistrate, Munger.
7. The District Education Officer, Munger.
8. The District Provident Fund Officer, Munger.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Devendra Prasad Singh
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Kumar Kamal Nayan
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 02-02-2024
Heard Mr. Devendra Prasad Singh, learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. Kumar Kamal
Nayan, learned counsel for the State.
2. The petitioner, wife of late Ajit Prasad, who died on
11.10.2011
after his superannuation from the post of Assistant
Teacher, by filing the present writ petition seeking quashing of
the letter dated 27.12.2019 issued under the signature of the
respondent no. 8, by which the claim for payment of due GPF
has been refused. Further prayer has been made to direct the
Patna High Court CWJC No.9362 of 2020 dt.02-02-2024
respondents concerned to ensure the payment of due amount of
GPF, Deposit Linked Insurance Scheme with penal interest,
besides the statutory interest as provided under the law.
3. It is the case of the petitioner that till date out of
Rs.6,15,274/- under the head of GPF, her husband has been paid
only Rs.4,81,904/- and the remaining amount of Rs.1,33,370/- is
still due for which the petitioner is entitled with interest.
4. Counter affidavit and supplementary counter affidavit
have been filed on behalf of respondent no. 8. In compliance of
the order of this Court dated 21.12.2023, the details of
temporary advance and the amount which has been deposited by
the erstwhile employee as shown in the pleader's notice dated
20.07.2018 has been duly responded in paragraph no. 10 of the
supplementary counter affidavit which reads as under:
"(a) An advance of Rs. 5500.00 vide memo
no. 8216-24 dated 16.07.1993 of the District
Superintendent of Education, Munger and the same
was refunded at the monthly installment of Rs.
210.00 X 21 from January 1994 to September
1995, Rs. 363 * 2 in the month of October 1995
and November 1995 and Rs. 364.00 in the month of
December 1995.
(b) An advance of Rs. 12000.00 vide memo
no. 4011 dated 21.11.1997 of the District
'Superintendent of Education, Munger- cum-Jamui
Patna High Court CWJC No.9362 of 2020 dt.02-02-2024
and the same was refunded at the monthly
installment of Rs. 500.00 X 24 from January 1998
to January 2000.
(E) An advance of Rs 40000.00 vide memo
no. 699 dated 15.03.2007 of the District
Superintendent of Education-cum-Sub Divisional
Education Officer, Jamui.
(i) The same was refunded at the monthly
installment of Rs. 2000.00 only from the month of
March, 2009 to February 2010 and the remaining
installment of next eight months was not shown
refunded by the husband of the petitioner as per
GPF deduction statement sent by the District
Programme Officer (Est.), Jamui vide his office
memo no, 146 dated 31.02.2012, hence the amount
of installment of next eight months remained due of
Rs. 2000.00 X 08 months Rs. 16000.00 was not
paid to the petitioner.
(ii) That again the respondent no. 8 has
sent letter no. 1125 dated 01.09.2021 to the
District Programme Officer (Estb.), Jamui for
verification of advance refund in between the
period from March 2010 to October 2010 (2000 X
8 months - Rs. 16000/-) and its reply was received
vide letter no. 579 dated 01.09.2021 by e-mail on
01.09.2021.
(iii) That on verification of advance
October 2010 against an advance of Rs.40000.00,
the authority slip vide this office Dispatch No. 783
dated 01.09.2021 has been issued to the District
Patna High Court CWJC No.9362 of 2020 dt.02-02-2024
Programme Officer (Estb.), Jamui for payment of a
sum of Rs.36,368.00 (thirty six thousand three
hundred sixty eight) only to the petitioner, which
includes Rs.16000/- along with statutory interest
till date against the claim shown in the pleader's
notice dated 20.07.2018 as per the statement of
deposit of advance by the erstwhile employee."
5. It is further submitted on behalf of the learned
counsel for the State that so far the payment of Deposit Linked
Insurance Scheme is concerned, an affidavit dated 17.07.2017
was received on 06.09.2017 at the hands of the petitioner and
after getting the affidavit, the amount of Deposit Linked
Insurance Scheme amounting to Rs.60,000/- was paid to the
petitioner vide office letter No. 44 dated 14.10.2017, so the
delay was at the petitioner's end. Moreover, there is no
provision for payment of any interest on Scheme 2006 and
thereby learned counsel for the respondents refuted the
contention of the petitioner. He next submitted that the entire
claim of the petitioner is based on a report which is a test check
report wherein advances were not taken into calculation. This
was the period in which new GPF software was under test
check. He further submits that the calculation chart which was
the basis of the petitioner's claim is found to be incorrect during
Patna High Court CWJC No.9362 of 2020 dt.02-02-2024
the course of verification.
6. At this juncture, learned counsel for the petitioner
submits that the petitioner has not been made available, the
calculation chart specifically showing the advance taken by the
petitioner and the bills submitted by the petitioner against the
advance which has been adjusted by the respondents. He next
submitted that irrespective of the fact that the petitioner has
been paid certain GPF amount but, much belatedly and as such
in any view of the matter, the petitioner is entitled for interest
over that amount.
7. Considering the rival submissions made on behalf of
the parties, this Court thinks it proper to dispose of the writ
petition with a direction to the respondent no. 8 to furnish a
fresh detailed chart showing the entitlement of the petitioner and
the advance taken and bill submitted by her husband and its
adjustment, preferably within a period of four weeks from the
date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.
8. Needless to observe that in case the petitioner is not
satisfied with the calculation chart, she shall be at remedy to file
an appropriate representation before the respondent no. 8, who
shall consider the claim of the petitioner and if any amount is
found payable, the same shall be paid to the petitioner within a
Patna High Court CWJC No.9362 of 2020 dt.02-02-2024
period of four weeks thereafter.
9. This disposes the writ petition.
(Harish Kumar, J)
Anjani/-
AFR/NAFR
CAV DATE
Uploading Date 05.02.2024
Transmission Date
