Facts
The applicant was appointed as a Driver in the Military Engineering Service (MES) on 30-06-1987 and retired upon superannuation on 31-08-2020
Source reference: p. 2, para 3Although retiral benefits are typically released promptly, the applicant’s pensionary benefits amounting to Rs. 22,83,147/- were delayed by over two years and two months
Source reference: p. 2, para 3The applicant submitted a representation on 22-12-2023 and a reminder on 22-03-2023 seeking 18% interest on the delayed payment, citing financial hardship and the necessity of private loans
Source reference: p. 2, para 3Consequently, the applicant filed this Original Application seeking directions for interest on the delayed amount
Source reference: p. 2, para 2Issues
Whether the respondents are liable to decide the applicant’s pending representations regarding the payment of interest on delayed retiral benefits in a time-bound manner
Source reference: p. 3, para 4; p. 3, para 7Law Applied
The Tribunal primarily relied on the legal principle established by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Vijay L. Mehrotra v. Union of India, (2001) 9 SCC 687, which mandates the payment of interest on delayed retiral dues
Source reference: p. 2-3, para 3-4the Tribunal applied the administrative law principle that competent authorities must dispose of pending representations through "reasoned and speaking orders"
Source reference: p. 4, para 7Reasoning
The applicant's counsel limited the prayer to a request for a direction to the competent authority to decide the pending representations dated 22-12-2023 and 22-03-2023
Source reference: p. 3, para 4The respondents raised no objection to this limited prayer, provided the merits of the case were not pre-judged
Source reference: p. 3, para 5Given the limited scope of the prayer and the established delay in payment, the Tribunal determined that the matter could be resolved without reaching the merits by directing an administrative review
Source reference: p. 3, para 6The Tribunal emphasized that this review must be conducted in light of the Vijay L. Mehrotra precedent, which addresses the right to interest on delayed terminal benefits
Source reference: p. 3-4, para 7Holding
The Tribunal disposed of the Original Application without costs
It directed the respondents/competent authority to decide the applicant's representations dated 22-12-2023 and 22-03-2023 in accordance with the law and the principles laid down in Vijay L. Mehrotra v. Union of India
Source reference: p. 3-4, para 7The respondents are ordered to pass a reasoned and speaking order within three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of the judgment
Source reference: p. 4, para 7Original Court PDF
PRATAP RAMvsMilitary Engineer Services (MES)
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in