High Court · 2025

1. Mr. D.C.S. Rawat , learned counsel for t he pet it ioner.

2. Mr. D.K. Joshi, learned counsel for t he respondent . Applicat ion I ndia challenged

3. Union of t he j udgm ent dat ed 15.09.2015 passed by learned Cent ral Adm inist rat ive Tribunal Allahabad Circuit Bench Nainit al Original No. 331/ 00055/ 2014. By t he said j udgm ent , original t he respondent int erest on delayed paym ent of ret iral dues, was allowed and Post al Depart m ent was direct ed t o pay int erest @ 9 percent per annum on t he delayed paym ent of ret iral benefit . applicat ion t hat respondent was From perusal of t he record, it is 4. revealed em ployee of Post al Depart m ent , who would have norm ally ret ired upon t he age of 60 years. He, at t aining however, sought volunt arily ret irem ent ; his prayer was accept ed and he ret ired w.e.f. 03.07.2013.

5. According t he am ount of ret iral dues was paid t o him in t he following m anner: - respondent , t o Pa r t i cu l a r s Pension for seven m ont hs Leave Encashm ent Grat uit y CGEI S Com m ut at ion of pension GPF D a t e 31.01.2014 08.10.2013 28.01.2014 28.01.2014 30.04.2014 19.10.2013 t here was som e delay 6. Since t he paym ent of adm issible dues respondent , t herefore, he approached Cent ral Adm inist rat ive Tribunal by filing an original applicat ion. Relevant ext ract of t he im pugned j udgm ent is reproduced below: - t o “ 1 0 . As regards pension of 7 m ont hs paid on 31.01.2014 and com m ut ed pension am ount , aft er rem oval of defect by t he appellant , t he sam e period was required t o process t he papers for t he said am ount s. We are of t he opinion t hat t he respondent s should have finalised t he said am ount s also wit hin 3 m ont hs of t he ret irem ent of t he applicant t hat is, up t o 03.10.2013. The applicant is, t herefore, ent it led t o int erest on t he said am ount s w.e.f. 04.10.2013 t ill t he dat e of t he paym ent . I t m ay be clar ified t hat pension for t he m ont h of Oct ober, 2013 t o Decem ber, 2013 becam e due t hereaft er and int erest on t he pension am ount for t he said m ont hs shall be payable for t he respect ive due dat es whereas no int erest is payable on pension of January, 2014 which was paid on t he due dat e i.e. 31.01.2024.”

7. Mr. D.C.S. Rawat , learned counsel appearing for t he pet it ioner subm it s t hat all t he ret iral dues were paid t o t he pet it ioner wit hin eight m ont hs of his ret irem ent ; t herefore, learned Tribunal erred in awarding int erest t o him on such delayed paym ent . He furt her subm it s t he am ount payable as Leave t hat Encashm ent cannot be t reat ed as ret iral dues so as t o at t ract int erest on delayed paym ent . I t is furt her cont ended t hat respondent him self was responsible for t he delay, as he subm it t ed t he necessary docum ent s on 02.07.2013 and on t he accept ance of his request of volunt ary ret irem ent . ret ired day,

8. Mr. D.K. Joshi, learned counsel appearing for t he respondent has relied upon a j udgm ent rendered by Hon’ble Suprem e Court in t he case of Vij ay L. Mehrot ra vs St at e of U.P. & ot hers, report ed in 2001 ( 9) SCC 687. Para 3 & 4 of t he said j udgm ent are reproduced below: - “ 3 . I n case of an em ployee ret ir ing aft er having rendered service, t he paym ent of t he ret iral benefit s should be paid on t he dat e of ret irem ent or soon t hereaft er if for som e unforeseen circum st ances t he paym ent s could not be m ade on t he dat e of ret irem ent . is expect ed t hat all t oget her. We, 4 . I n t his case, t here is absolut ely no reason or j ust ificat ion for not m aking t he paym ent s for t he m ont hs respondent t o pay t o t he appellant w it hin 12 weeks from t oday sim ple int erest at t he rat e of 18 per cent w it h effect from t he dat e of her t he dat e of ret irem ent , paym ent s” t herefore, direct i.e., 31- 8- 1997 t ill t o int erfere wit h I n such view of t he m at t er, we are 9. t he inclined im pugned j udgm ent rendered by learned Tribunal. Adm it t edly, t here is som e delay on t he part of t he Post al Aut horit ies in releasing t he respondent . The explanat ion offered by t he pet it ioner for delayed paym ent of ret iral dues does not appear t o be plausible. Learned Cent ral Adm inist rat ive Tribunal was, allowing t he original applicat ion. ret iral dues t herefore, j ust ified t he t o

10. Accordingly, t he writ pet it ion fails and is dism issed. ( A sh i sh N a i t h a n i , J.) ( M a n o j K u m a r Ti w a r i , J.)

06.05.2025 Aswal NITI RAJ SINGH ASWAL DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=eacc6757ee7881e933ff8934f07477005aa85f9802a3a08b08d1369 512ea30f3, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=44EB54CBF00B7698CB6F10C2CE3D26F5C22DACF4F4610C1 FE58A58531726FBB0, cn=NITI RAJ SINGH ASWAL