K.seshagiri Rao v. 1. The Sub Treasury Officer

.....RESPONDENTS Petition Under Article 226 o1 the constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue writ, order or direclion more in the nature of Mandamus declaring that the petitioner is entitled for payment of interest at suitable rates on belated payments of pension and other retirement benefits from the subsequent date of to the date of rctease the same during 2016 petitioner retirement i.e. 1€-1996 with all attendant benefits. I.A.NO:1 OF 2017 (WPMP.NO:37171 OF 20171 Petition Under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the peti{ion, the High court may be pleased to direct the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for payment of I I i I I i I \ t I I I I ', i i interest on be ated payments of pension and other retirement benefits from 1.8.1996 to the date of release of the pensionary benefits, pending disposal of the above writ petition. !.A.NO:1 OF 2018 Between:

1. The Sub Treasury Officer, Khammam. Khammam District. 2. The Accountant General, TS, Hyderabad. 3. The Sub Treasury Officer, Kakinada, East Godavari Dis;trict, A.P. 4. The Dire:tor of Agriculture, State of Telangana, Hyderabad. 5. State of 'lelangana, represented by its APC and Secretary to Govemment, Agriculture and Cooperation Department, Secretariat, llyderabad. . ....PETITIONERS AND K.Seshagiri Rao, S/o. Satyanarayana, Aged about 80 ye_ars, .fgtigd^ Agricultural Officer (5C), Bhadrachalanj, BadrtdriKothagudem District, Rro.H.No.9-3-64, Madura Basti, Kothaguclem, Badradri Kothagudem District. Petition Under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Cotlrt may be pleased to vacate the inte,rim order dated 04.09.2017 in WPMP.No. 1\717112018 in WP.No. .....RESPONDENI

2985312017. Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI D.BALA KISHAN RAO Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 & 3 : GP FOR FINANCE AND PI-ANNING Counsel for the Respondent No.2 : SRI M.RATNA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent Nos.4 & 5 : GP FOR AGRICULTURE The Court made the following ORDER 1 wp_29E53_2O17 N8(, J THE HON 'BLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA WRIT PET ITION No.29853 of2O17 ORDER: Thiswritpetitionislrledbythepetitiorrerseekingadirectiontothe respondents to pay interest on the delayed release of petrsionary benefits' which were withheld for nearly two decades after his retirement'

2. The case olthe petitioner is that he was serving as Agricultural Officer (SC), Palvoncha, when he was placed under suspension vide Proceedings dated 21.6. 1988. A charge memo was issued on 17'2'1990' The petitioner remained under suspension until his retirement on3l-7.1996' Subsequently, by G.O.Rt.No.735, dated 15.7.2002, the Government imposed the recovery of punishment of withhotding his entire pension and Rs.7,42,879.50. It is stated that petitioner c'hallenged the said Govemment order in o.A.No.8003 of 2002. The Tribunal, after due enquiry', set aside the saidG.o.onl6.ll.20C6holdingittobewithoutjurisdiction.Italsodirected that if a lresh enquiry was to be conducted, the same must be completed within l6 wecks fiom the date ofreceipt ofthe order' It is contended that the respondents, howcver. tailed to comply with the above time-bound direction and issue<l c.o.Rt.No. 932, dated 25.7.2OO7,appointing an Enquiry officer well beyond the deadtine. The petitioner again approached the Tribunal in O.A.No. 5865 ol 1007.'the Tribunal allowed th€ O'A' on 4'12'2008' quashing the said C.O., and directed immediate release of pensionary benefits- It is contended that the offrcial respondents carried the matter in W.P.No.7026 ol 2009 betbre this Court, which was dismissed on 01.04.2014. A luther SLP No' 836912015 was filed before the Hon'ble Supreme Court. rvhich also came to be dismissed on l'7'2015' thereby putting an end to the dispute on the validity of the disciplinary action' By I 5 t I I i i : t I i I q i ! : . 2 wp_29E53_2017 NAK, J following the judicial orders, Govemment issued C.O.Rt.No.289, dated

17.6.2015,lbr release of pensionary benefits. Respondcnt No.2 accordingly released tht: same by letter dated 22.1.2016. It is not in dispute that the petitioner re tired on 3 I .7. 1996, and that his benefits were released almost 20 years later.

3. Heanl Mr. D. Balakishan Rao, leamed counsel fc,r the petitioner; and leamed Government Pleader for Agriculture. Perused tte record.

4. The ir;sue now before this Court is whether the petitioner is entitled to interest for t.tre inordinate delay in disbursing his retirereent dues. The facts clearly dem,rnstrate that the delay was entirely attributable to administrative and procedrral lapses of the respondents. 'Ihe Trit,unal's direction to complete enquiry within l6 weeks was blatantly disregarded. The eventual release of pensionary benefits after prolonged litigation proves the petitioner's :onsistent stand that the disciplinary action was unlawful.

5. It is a settled principle ol law that pension is not a bounty but a right earned by the employee after long years of service. Courts have consistently held that any delay in payrnent ol pension, especially rvhen not caused by the employr:e, must caffy cotnpcnsation in the fbrm of interest. In this context, the Hon'ble Suprerne Court in Union o1'lndia v. T N. Natarajan, and several otherjudgments, has uphcld the right ofretired enployees to receive interest on delayed retirement bcncflts.

6. The petitioner has undergonc undue hardship for ahnost two decades due to denial of his rightful dues. The delay was neither trivial nor justified, and the resyrondents' action has clearl-v caused finan,:ial and emotional distress to a retired govemment servant. ln the circur stances, this Court finds sufficit:nt justification to allou,the prayer olthe pttitioner. / t, 3 wP_29853_2O17 NAK, I 7 . Accordingly, the writ petitbn is allowed' The respondents are directed to pay interest at the rate of l2{o per annum on all delayed pensionary benefits from 31.07.1996,i.e.,the date of retirement, till 22.01.2016, i'e', the date ofactual release. Such interest shalt be paid within a period of eight (8) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order' failing which the interest shall further accrue at the same rate till the date of actual payment' No costs. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any' shall stand closed' //TRUE COPY// SD/ M. OSMAN ALI BAIG S ANT REGISTRAR SECTION OFFICER To

1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

7. o o 1 SA GJP The Sub Treasury Officer, Khammam. Khammam The Accountant General, TS, Hyderabad The Sub Treasury Officer , Kakinada, Easi Godavari District' A.P. The Director of Agriculture, State of Telang ana, HYd erabad. The APC and Secretary to Government, Ag riculture and &operation Department, Secretariat, State of Telangana at Hyd erabad. Two CCs to GP FOR AG RICULTURE, High Court for the State of Telangana Hish court ror the state or +Xta,Sl;Ug'"t FTNANCE AND lli cs I i'il 0.Two CD CoPies (fl. ''[E& ffi? ;tirg"ia?1"3,' "r ,#'B[lff[ 'LANN'NG, .,-1;l!?i"_ l... .- ,,;'i'5i" ' r-"' - iX 'lf Sfn 6p5 \d.1i- - '-.. ;_, \ HIGH COURT DATED:21010312025 ORDER WP.No.2t9853 ot 2017 ALLOWII{G THE W.P WITHOUT COSTS. Q+" @ h \ \'r