M.Lakshmi v. The Secretary to Government Health Department

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED: 10.09.2009CORAM:THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE D.HARIPARANTHAMANW.P.No.9264 of 2007M.Lakshmi... PetitionerVs.1.The Secretary to Government Health Department Fort St. George, Chennai – 9.2.The Secretary to Government Finance (Pension) Department Fort St. George, Chennai – 9.3.The Director of Public Health D.M.S. Compound, Teynampet, Chennai.4.Director of Treasuries and Accounts Chennai – 15.5.The Deputy Director of Public Health and Preventive Medicine Sivagangai.... Respondents PRAYER: This Writ Petition came to be numbered under Article 226 ofthe Constitution of India by way of transfer of O.A.No.954 of 2002from the file of Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal with a prayer todirect the respondents in particularly 3rd respondent to grantmonetary benefits and arrears of pay available to the husband of theapplicant taking into consideration his service for the period from01.11.1973 to 23.03.1994 to the applicant with interest at 12% perannum, and to direct the respondents to pay the interest at 12% perannum for the period of delay in payment of Rs.1,64,882/- towards thefamily pension and gratuity. For Petitioner:Mr.A.R.NixonFor Respondents :Mrs.C.K.VishnupriyaAdditional Government Pleader https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ O R D E RThe Original Application in O.A.No.954 of 2002 before theTamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal is the present writ petition. 2.The husband of the petitioner by name K.Muthusamy wasemployed as a regular Mazdoor from 01.11.1973. He died on23.02.1994, while he was in service at the Primary Health Centre,Nerkuppai, Devakottai Health Unit District. The petitioner, who isthe wife of the deceased, was not paid family pension and otherterminal benefits for a long time. She was paid the provisionalfamily pension by the Deputy Director of Health Services, Sivaganga,in his proceedings R.No.5821/A3/99 dated 27.11.2000. That is, aftersix years and nine months of the death, the petitioner was paid theprovisional pension. Thereafter, the Accountant General, Chennai, inhis proceedings dated 21.05.2001, sanctioned the full family pensionand also DCRG of Rs.20,808/-. The fixation and increment arrears forthe period from October 1978 to 15.11.1993 was also sanctioned atRs.11,678/-. These amounts were disbursed to the petitioner, afterthe aforesaid order of the Accountant General, dated 21.05.2001. Thefirst respondent has also issued G.O.(D)No.189, Health and FamilyWelfare Department, dated 03.03.2004, sanctioning a sum ofRs.23,896/- towards interest for the belated payment of DCRG ofRs.20,808/-.3.In the meantime, the petitioner filed OriginalApplication in O.A.No.954 of 2002 (W.P.No.9264 of 2007) praying for(i) arrears of pay due to the grant of revision and annual incrementsfrom 01.11.1973 to 23.03.1994 with interest at 12% per annum; (ii)interest at 12% per annum for the belated payment of Rs.1,64,882/-paid towards the family pension and DCRG. 4.Heard Mr.A.R.Nixon, learned counsel for the petitionerand Mrs.C.K.Vishnupriya, learned Additional Government Pleader forthe respondents. 5.The respondents filed reply affidavit. It is made clearin the reply affidavit that there was a delay in settlement ofterminal benefits due to the fact that the Service Register of thedeceased Government employee was not found. It is stated in thereply affidavit that a duplicate Service Register was opened in theOffice of the Deputy Director of Health Services, Sivaganga and asthe particulars recorded in the duplicate Service Register were notsufficient for sending necessary proposals for family pension to theAccountant General, Chennai, the same was sent to various Districtssuch as Erode, Coimbatore and Dharmapuri, where the deceasedGovernment employee worked, to record the entries regarding hisservice which are necessary for the purpose of pension. The delay isthus explained by the respondents.A letter in R.No.32920/VC1/2002/C3,dated 01.09.2009 issued by the third respondent to the learned https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Additional Government Pleader is also placed on record. In the saidletter, it is stated as follows:"Further I have to state that at the time of thedeath of the petitioner's husband, his serviceRegister was not found and therefore a duplicateService Register was opened in the Officer of theDeputy Director of Health Services, Sivaganga. As theparticulars recorded in the duplicate Service Registerare not sufficient for sending necessary FamilyPension proposals to the Accountant General, Chennai,the delay has occurred. However, now all the terminalbenefits have been settled to the applicant."Therefore, the respondents have admitted that there is a long delayin settling the terminal benefits. 6.As per the reply affidavit and also the G.O.(D)No.189,Health and Family Welfare Department, dated 03.03.2004 enclosed alongwith reply affidavit, it is clear that the Deputy Director of HealthServices issued his proceedings dated 27.11.2000, providing forprovisional family pension of Rs.1,275/- per month from 01.11.1973.An amount of Rs.1,32,986/- towards provisional family pension from24.02.1994 to 30.11.2000 was paid to the petitioner, pursuant to theaforesaid proceedings of the Deputy Director of Health Services.Further, the provisional family pension of Rs.5,544/- for the periodfrom 01.12.2000 to 28.02.2001 and an equal sum of Rs.5,544/- for theperiod March to May 2001 was paid. Thus, the petitioner was paidRs.1,44,074/- towards provisional family pension after about sevenyears of the death of the deceased Government employee. Further,pursuant to an order dated 21.05.2001 of the Accountant General, fullfamily pension was paid, besides the payment of Rs.20,808/- towardsDCRG and Rs.11,678/- towards fixation and increment arrears for theperiod from October 1978 to 15.11.1993.7.The second prayer in the writ petition is for interestfor the amount of Rs.1,64,882/- paid towards the family pension andDCRG. Rs.20,808/- represents DCRG. The same was paid pursuant tothe sanction order dated 21.05.2001 of the Accountant General. Sincethere was a delay, the first respondent issued G.O.(D)No.189, Healthand Family Welfare Department, dated 03.03.2004, sanctioning a sum ofRs.23,896/- towards interest for the belated payment of DCRG amountof Rs.20,808/- to the petitioner. The said interest was paid as thesame is provided under the Rules. As far as the payment of interestto DCRG is concerned, the same is met by the respondents. Therefore,the issue is whether the respondents have to pay interest for thebelated payment of Rs.1,44,074/- towards the family pension or not.8.It is contended by the learned Additional GovernmentPleader that the petitioner is not entitled to interest for family https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ pension as the Rules do not provide for payment of interest. On theother hand, the learned counsel for the petitioner relies on adecision of a Division Bench of this Court in GOVERNMENT OF TAMILNADU, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT VS. M.DEIVASIGAMANIreported in 2009 (3) MLJ 1, in support of his submission that thoughthe Rules do not provide payment of interest, if there is a belatedpayment of terminal benefits, including pension, the Government isbound to pay interest for the belated payment. The said DivisionBench judgment granted interest for the belated payment at the rateof 10%, following the decision of the Honourable Apex Court inS.K.DUE VS. STATE OF HARYANA reported in 2008 (3) SCC 44. Para 7 ofthe aforesaid Division Bench judgment is usefully extracted here-under:"In view of the judgment of the Supreme Court,it is now well settled that an employee is entitledto interest on belated payment of pension and otherretiral benefits, even in the absence of statutoryrules/administrative instructions or guidelines andhe can make his claim for interest, under Part IIIof the Constitution, relying on Articles 14, 19 and21 of the Constitution."9.In view of the categorical pronouncement of the DivsionBench of this Court, the petitioner is entitled to interest for thebelated payment of pension. 10.The first prayer in the writ petition is for the paymentof revision in pay and the arrears in salary payable to the deceasedGovernment employee during his service period with interest.Rs.11,678/- was paid, as seen from the G.O.(D)No.189, Health andFamily Welfare Department, dated 03.03.2004 of the first respondent,towards fixation and increment arrears for the period from October1978 to 15.11.1993, after May 2001. Here also, the concerned employeewas not given the proper fixation and increments whenever it felldue for the non-availability of Service Register. In my consideredview, since the fixation and increments were paid after 20 years, forno fault of the employee concerned, the respondents are bound to payinterest for such belated payment also, in consonance with Article 21of the Constitution. 11.Further, the petitioner is entitled to interest as perSection 3(1) read with 2(c) of the Interest Act, 1978 (hereinafterreferred to as the "Act"). Section 2(c) of the Act defines "debt",which is as follows:-"2(c) "debt" means any liability for anascertained sum of money and includes a debt payablein kind, but does not include a judgment debt;" https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Section 3(1) is also extracted here-under:"3-(1) In any proceedings for the recoveryof any debt or damages or in any proceedings in whicha claim for interest in respect of any debt ordamages already paid is made, the Court may, if itthinks fit, allow interest to the person entitled tothe debt or damages or to the person making suchclaim, as the case may be, at a rate not exceedingthe current rate of interest, for the whole or partof the following period, that is to say,-(a) if the proceedings relate to a debtpayable by virtue of a written instrument at acertain time, then, from the date when the debt ispayable to the date of institution of theproceedings;(b) if the proceedings do not relate to anysuch debt, then, from the date mentioned in thisregard in a written notice given by the personentitled or the person making the claim to the personliable that interest will be claimed, to the date ofinstitution of the proceedings:Provided that where the amount of the debtor damages has been repaid before the institution ofthe proceedings, interest shall not be allowed underthis section for the period after such repayment".12.As per Section 2(c), any liability for an ascertainedsum of money, is debt under the Act. Here, the ascertained liabilityis Rs.11,678/- towards the arrears on fixation and increments from1978 to 1993. Hence, the petitioner is entitled to interest at leastat the current rate of interest. I am inclined to fix the rate ofinterest at 10% for the amount of Rs.11,678/-. However, the interestis ordered from the date of death, 23.02.1994 only. Hence, thepetitioner is entitled to interest for the aforesaid amount ofRs.11,678/- at 10%, till it was paid at least from 23.02.1994.13.Hence, a direction is issued to the respondents to payinterest at 10% for the belated payment of family pension and arrearsof salary pursuant to fixation of pay and increment for the period1978 to 1993 from the date of death till the payment was made, withina period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of thisorder. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

14.With the above direction, the writ petition is disposedof. No costs. Sd/-Asst.Registrar/True Copy/Sub.Asst.RegistrarTKTo1.The Secretary to Government Health Department Fort St. George, Chennai – 9.2.The Secretary to Government Finance (Pension) Department Fort St. George, Chennai – 9.3.The Director of Public Health D.M.S. Compound, Teynampet, Chennai.4.The Director of Treasuries and Accounts Chennai – 15.5.The Deputy Director of Public Health and Preventive Medicine Sivagangai.+ 1 CC to Government Pleader,SR.46383W.P.No.9264 of 2007MG(CO)EM/30.9