Bhagwat Narayan Jha Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors. - Court Judgment

Excerpt:
- constitution of india. articles 12 & 226: [m. karpaga vinayagam, c.j., narendra nath tiwari & d.p.singh, jj] writ petition - maintainability - whether state co-operative milk producers federation ltd., is a state within meaning of article 12 ? - held, from perusal of relevant rules of byelaws, it is clear that state government has no role to play either in policy decision for raising funds for federation or its expenditure and thus have no financial control. further there is nothing to indicate that government has any functional and administrative control over federation. state government has no role to play in matter of appointment of any of officials of federation including managing director. federation is totally independent in all respects and in no way subservient to state government in conduct of its business. federation in no way can be termed as agency of state government and does not come within meaning of article 12 of constitution. writ petitions against federation is not maintainable. order1. the appellant retired in the year, 1997 and was paid the retiral benefits but total benefits not having been paid, a writ petition being w.p. (s) no. 5060 of 2001 was preferred by him wherein a bench of this court by order dated 26th march, 2002 while held that the appellant was entitled for due payment, directed the authorities to pay the same. subsequently, the appellant preferred another writ petition being w.p. (s) no. 2044 of 2005 statutory interest on the provident fund amount having not been paid which was deducted from the salary of the appellant.2. the learned single judge by order dated 5th may, 2005 having noticed that the entire amount has been paid and the grievance is only with regard to the statutory interest., which was not paid as the provident fund amount was not deposited in time, did not choose to grant any relief.3. on 25th april. 2006 when the case was taken up the following order was passed:admittedly the appellant is entitled to contributory provident fund. if no statutory interest for payment on contributory provident fund is prescribed to the employees of zila parishad then the respondents are directed to file affidavit as to why the statutory interest prescribed for payment on contributory provident fund or general provident fund or f.p.f. be not allowed and paid in favour of the appellant.place this case for further heading under the heading for order on 3rd may, 2006.pendency of this appeal shall not stand in the way of the respondents to calculate and pay the statutory interest to the appellant at the rate the state government's employees were entitled or p.p.f. account holders are entitled.let a copy of this order be handed over to the learned counsel appearing for the zila parishad.4. in pursuance of the court's order the deputy development commissioner-cum-chief executive officer, zila parishad, west singhbhum. chaibasa, has appeared and handed over an account payee cheque bearing no. 274502 dated 8th may, 2006, issued by the bank of baroda, chaibasa in the name of the appellant bhagwat narayan jha for rs. 21,559.90 paise and handed over the same to the counsel for the appellant. it is submitted that the said has been calculated towards statutory interest of provident fund on the basis of the statutory interest, as was prevailing up to the date of retirement.5. counsel for the appellant, submitted that the respondents have paid interest at the rate of 5% per annum with effect from 1st march, 1997 i.e. the date the appellant retired from service. this fact has been accepted by the counsel for the deputy development commissioner-cum-chief executive officer. zila parishad. west sighbhum. chaibasa. as according to them, the appellant was entitled for statutory interest up to the date of retirement and then 5% because of delayed payment.6. we are not agreeable with the submissions made on behalf of the deputy development commissioner-cum-chief executive officer, zila parishad. the state government has fixed penal interest at the rate of 5% per annum i.e. in addition to the amount of statutory interest, to which a person is entitled under law. if the appellant was entitled for statutory, interest at the rate of 12.5% or 10.5% or 9.5% or 9% etc. in one or other year, the respondents should have calculated the statutory interest accordingly till the amount is handed over to the appellant. the authority should have calculated the statutory interest, as prescribed for the state government's employees up to 30th april. 2006.7. in the facts and circumstances, while we set aside the impugned order dated 5th may, 2005, passed by the learned single judge in w.p. (s) no. 2044 of 2005, direct the deputy development commissioner-cum-chief executive officer. zila parishad, west singhbhum, chaibasa to calculate up-to-date statutory interest on the provident fund amount and after adjusting the amount already paid, to pay the amount in favour of the appellant within two months along with a cost of rs. 10.000/- in favour of the appellant.8. the petition for exemption from appearance, filed on behalf of the director. panchayati raj, jharkhand. ranchi, is allowed considering the grounds shown therein. the appearance of the deputy development commissioner-cum-chief executive officer, zila parishad. west singhbhum. chaibasa. is also dispensed with.9. this appeal is, thus, allowed with the aforesara observations and directions along with the cost, as ordered above.

Judgment:
ORDER

1. The appellant retired in the year, 1997 and was paid the retiral benefits but total benefits not having been paid, a writ petition being W.P. (S) No. 5060 of 2001 was preferred by him wherein a Bench of this Court by order dated 26th March, 2002 while held that the appellant was entitled for due payment, directed the authorities to pay the same. Subsequently, the appellant preferred another writ petition being W.P. (S) No. 2044 of 2005 statutory interest on the provident fund amount having not been paid which was deducted from the salary of the appellant.

2. The learned single Judge by order dated 5th May, 2005 having noticed that the entire amount has been paid and the grievance is only with regard to the statutory interest., which was not paid as the provident fund amount was not deposited in time, did not choose to grant any relief.

3. On 25th April. 2006 when the case was taken up the following order was passed:

Admittedly the appellant is entitled to contributory provident fund. If no statutory interest for payment on contributory provident fund is prescribed to the employees of Zila Parishad then the respondents are directed to file affidavit as to why the statutory interest prescribed for payment on contributory provident fund or general provident fund or F.P.F. be not allowed and paid in favour of the appellant.

Place this case for further heading under the heading for Order on 3rd May, 2006.

Pendency of this appeal shall not stand in the way of the respondents to calculate and pay the statutory interest to the appellant at the rate the State Government's employees were entitled or P.P.F. account holders are entitled.

Let a copy of this order be handed over to the learned Counsel appearing for the Zila Parishad.

4. In pursuance of the Court's order the Deputy Development Commissioner-cum-Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, West Singhbhum. Chaibasa, has appeared and handed over an Account Payee Cheque bearing No. 274502 dated 8th May, 2006, issued by the Bank of Baroda, Chaibasa in the name of the appellant Bhagwat Narayan Jha for Rs. 21,559.90 paise and handed over the same to the counsel for the appellant. It is submitted that the said has been calculated towards statutory interest of provident fund on the basis of the statutory interest, as was prevailing up to the date of retirement.

5. Counsel for the appellant, submitted that the respondents have paid interest at the rate of 5% per annum with effect from 1st March, 1997 i.e. the date the appellant retired from service. This fact has been accepted by the counsel for the Deputy Development Commissioner-cum-Chief Executive Officer. Zila Parishad. West Sighbhum. Chaibasa. as according to them, the appellant was entitled for statutory interest up to the date of retirement and then 5% because of delayed payment.

6. We are not agreeable with the submissions made on behalf of the Deputy Development Commissioner-cum-Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad. The State Government has fixed penal interest at the rate of 5% per annum i.e. in addition to the amount of statutory interest, to which a person is entitled under law. If the appellant was entitled for statutory, interest at the rate of 12.5% or 10.5% or 9.5% or 9% etc. in one or other year, the respondents should have calculated the statutory interest accordingly till the amount is handed over to the appellant. The authority should have calculated the statutory interest, as prescribed for the State Government's employees up to 30th April. 2006.

7. In the facts and circumstances, while we set aside the impugned order dated 5th May, 2005, passed by the learned single Judge in W.P. (S) No. 2044 of 2005, direct the Deputy Development Commissioner-cum-Chief Executive Officer. Zila Parishad, West Singhbhum, Chaibasa to calculate up-to-date statutory interest on the provident fund amount and after adjusting the amount already paid, to pay the amount in favour of the appellant within two months along with a cost of Rs. 10.000/- in favour of the appellant.

8. The petition for exemption from appearance, filed on behalf of the Director. Panchayati Raj, Jharkhand. Ranchi, is allowed considering the grounds shown therein. The appearance of the Deputy Development Commissioner-cum-Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad. West Singhbhum. Chaibasa. is also dispensed with.

9. This appeal is, thus, allowed with the aforesara observations and directions along with the cost, as ordered above.