Facts
Mr. Kishore Kumar, aged 62, filed an Original Application under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, seeking the release of his pending retiral dues, including 50% of Gratuity, GIS, GPF, and pending LTC bills, with 12% interest per annum from the due date.
Source reference: p.2He also sought 12% interest on the delayed payments of arrears of Leave Encashment, 7th CPC, and Gratuity that had already been disbursed.
Source reference: p.2The Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) did not file a counter-reply, as it was an admitted position that certain retiral dues had not been paid due to financial crunch, a situation acknowledged in a series of similar matters before the Tribunal.
Source reference: p.2Issues
1. Whether Mr. Kishore Kumar is entitled to the release of his pending retiral dues, including Gratuity, GIS, GPF, and pending LTC bills.
Source reference: p.22. Whether Mr. Kishore Kumar is entitled to interest on the delayed payment of his pending retiral dues and on the delayed payments of already disbursed arrears.
Source reference: p.23. What rate of interest should be applied to delayed retiral dues.
Source reference: p.3Law Applied
The court primarily applied Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, which governs the filing of Original Applications seeking reliefs in service matters.
Source reference: p.2It explicitly referred to and followed the decision rendered by the Full Bench of the Tribunal in O.A. No. 2821/2023, Rajbir Singh v. MCD & Ors., decided on October 30, 2025.
Source reference: p.3This precedent established that interest is payable on delayed payments of GPF, pension, and gratuity at the GPF rate for the relevant years, calculated on a compound interest basis.
Source reference: p.3The Rajbir Singh judgment also clarified that Rule 65 specifically provides for interest on delayed payments at the GPF rate for service matters, distinguishing it from contractual agreements.
Source reference: p.3Reasoning
The Tribunal noted that the respondent, MCD, had not filed a counter-reply, considering it an admitted fact that retiral dues were unpaid due to financial constraints.
Source reference: p.2This allowed for the present matter to be disposed of without a counter-reply.
Source reference: p.2The court relied entirely on its previous Full Bench decision in Rajbir Singh v. MCD & Ors., which addressed similar issues regarding delayed retiral payments.
Source reference: p.3That judgment established the principle that interest is payable on delayed GPF, pension, and gratuity at the GPF rate, compounded.
Source reference: p.3The Rajbir Singh decision specifically ruled that Rule 65 mandates interest on delayed payments at the GPF rate.
Source reference: p.3The Tribunal found the facts of the present case to fall squarely within the principles established in Rajbir Singh (supra), thus entitling the applicant to the specified interest rate on delayed payments.
Source reference: p.4Holding
The Tribunal directed the respondents to release all admissible payments, if not already released, within two months from the date of receipt of the certified copy of the Order.
The applicant was deemed entitled to interest at GPF rates on delayed payments as per the decision in O.A. No. 2821/2023, Rajbir Singh (supra), subject to the final outcome of proceedings pending before the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in that matter.
Source reference: p.4The Original Application was disposed of in these terms.
Source reference: p.5Original Court PDF
Kishore Kumar v. The Commissioner, Municipal Corporation of Delhi [O.A. No. 2075/2025]
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in