Meena Devi W/o Late Moti Ram vs The State of Bihar

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State.

From the pleadings on record, it appears that now all

admitted dues have been either paid or necessary orders passed.

The husband of the petitioner died in harness in the

year 2004, but only in the end of 2017, she has been paid her dues

including family pension for which there can be no justification. On

a query of the Court to learned counsel for the petitioner as to the

reason for such delay, the reply is that the G.P.F. account of the late

husband of the petitioner has not been opened and number given and,

thus, the same took some time. However, with regard to delay in

grant of family pension, no reasonable explanation was forthcoming.

It is an admitted position that initially only

provisional pension was paid to the petitioner but in the year 2011

that was also stopped and final pension has now been granted only in

late 2017. Thus, having regard to the aforesaid, the Court awards

interest at the rate of 9% on the delayed payment, limited to family

pension, for the period when her provisional pension was stopped till

the time it was restored in 2017, following the judgment of the

Hon''ble Supreme Court in the case of D.D. Tewari v. Uttar

Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd . reported as (2014) 8 SCC 894.

The same shall be paid to her within two months from the date of

production of a copy of this order before the respondent no. 4.

The writ petition stands disposed off in the

aforementioned terms.