Full Judgment Text
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 1
PETITIONER:
UNION OF INDIA
Vs.
RESPONDENT:
SHRI UJAGAR LAL
DATE OF JUDGMENT: 07/10/1996
BENCH:
K. RAMASWAMY, G.B. PATTANAIK
ACT:
HEADNOTE:
JUDGMENT:
O R D E R
Though notice was sent to the respondent on May 8, 1992
till date neither the acknowledgment card nor unserved
notice has been received back. Under those circumstances,
notice must be deemed to have served.
Leave granted.
The only question argued in this appeal is: whether the
respondent is entitled to the payment of interest for
failure to release the death-cumretirement gratuity under
the Rules? The Tribunal in the impugned order made on
22.11.1990 in OA No.1383/90 directed interest @ 7% per
annum for the first twelve months and @ 10% per annum for
the period thereafter The admitted position is that the
respondent was unauthorisedly in occupation of the quarter
allotted to him and therefore, he was not paid death-cum-
retirement gratuity since the respondent had remained in
possession unauthorisedly for more than two years. This
question was considered by this Court in Raj Pal Wahi & Ors.
vs. Union of India & Ors. [SLP (C) Nos.7688-9l/88] decided
on 27.11.1989 and held that in those circumstances the Court
unable to hold that the petitioners are entitled to get
interest for the delayed payment of death-cum-retirement
gratuity as the delay in payment occurred due to the order
passed on the basis or the said circular of Railway Board
and not on account of administrative lapse. In this case, in
view of the circular issued by the administration directing
not to make payment of death-cum-retirement gratuity till
the retired employee surrenders possession, the delay in
payment was not due to any administrative lapse but on
account of the circular issued by the Board. Under these
circumstances, the respondent is not entitled to the
interest as directed by the Tribunal.
The appeal is accordingly allowed. No costs.