Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 2]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Tej Kaur And Another vs State Of Haryana And Others on 21 January, 2013

Author: Rajesh Bindal

Bench: Rajesh Bindal

                CWP No. 16091 of 2012                          (1)



            IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                         AT CHANDIGARH

                                            CWP No. 16091 of 2012 (O&M)
                                                 Date of decision : 21.1.2013


Tej Kaur and another                                         .. Petitioners
                                        versus
State of Haryana and others                                  .. Respondents


Coram:        Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal


Present:      Mr. Ram Niwas Sharma, Advocate, for the petitioners.
              Mr. D. D. Gupta, Additional Advocate General, Haryana.


Rajesh Bindal, J.

The petitioners, who retired as teachers on 31.5.2008 and 31.1.2008 respectively, have filed the present writ petition for directions to the respondents to pay the amount of gratuity already sanctioned along with interest.

After issuance of notice of motion in the present writ petition, a sum of ` 1,93,496/- have been paid to petitioner no. 1 - Tej Kaur vide cheque no. 978978, and a sum of ` 1,51,123/- have been paid to petitioner no. 2 Usha Mehta, vide cheque no. 978977, both dated 14.11.2012, both drawn on Oriental Bank of Commerce, Yamuna Nagar. This satisfies the claim of the petitioners as far as the payment of gratuity is concerned. However, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that in view of instructions issued by the Government of Haryana, Department of Finance, dated 20.2.2002, on account of delay in disbursement of retiral dues, an employee is entitled to interest at the same rate at which it is paid on GPF amount.

It is not in dispute that amount of gratuity was sanctioned in favour of the petitioners on 27.11.2009 and 8.1.2010, respectively, however, still the amount was not paid till such time the present writ petition was CWP No. 16091 of 2012 (2) filed. Considering the delay in disbursement of gratuity and also the instructions issued by the Finance Department, in my opinion, the petitioners are entitled to payment of interest @ 8% per annum on the amount of gratuity. Petitioner no. 1 shall be paid interest from September, 2008 till the date of payment whereas petitioner no. 2 shall be paid interest from May 2008 till the date of payment. The amount of interest be paid within a period of three months from today.

The writ petition stands disposed of.



21.1.2013                                               (Rajesh Bindal)
vs                                                            Judge