RAJESH TANDON,J. - (1.) HEARD the learned Counsel for the parties.
(2.) BY the present writ petition the petitioner has prayed for the issue of a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to pay to the petitioner G.P.F. due to him paid to him after attaining the age of superannuation and to refix the post retirement benefits after its rightful calculation. Briefly stated that the petitioner was initially appointed with the respondents in 1961 as House Visitor in the department of Malaria. By the passage of time the department of Malaria no more existed and consequent thereof the petitioner was transferred to the Family Planning Department in 1967. Lastly at the time when the petitioner attained the age of superannuation on 30.11.1997, the petitioner was working as Health Supervisor in Samudayik Swasth Kendra, Vetalghat. The petitioner has stated that despite his retirement in the year 1997, he has not been paid the outstanding amount in his G.P. Fund account. He has also stated that the pensionary benefits settled by the respondents has been made on a wrongful calculation and the total amount payable to the petitioner by way of the pension has been reduced considerably. The petitioner has further stated that when the respondents have not paid any heed to the several requests made by the petitioner, he drew the attention of the Pension Court for redressal of his grievance. The respondents after putting in appearance before the Pension Court had given an undertaking that the entire amount payable to the petitioner will be disbursed within a month from the date of the proceedings but even then no amount had been paid to him. The petitioner has further submitted that he has filed representations on 28.2.2000, 10.5.2001, 20.9.2001, 21.11.2001, 16.10.2001, 29.12.2001, 29.5.2002, 22.11.2002 and 20.1.2003 but despite repeated representations of the petitioner no reply has been received from the side of the respondents.
(3.) IN the case 1985 (1) SCC (sic), State of Kerala and others v. M Padmanabhan Nair, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that pension is a valuable right and property and the petitioner has a right to claim by virtue of the continuous services rendered by him. The observations of the Apex Court are quoted below: "Pension and gratuity are no longer any bounty to be distributed by the Government to its employees on their retirement but have become, under the decisions of this Court, valuable rights and property in their hands and any culpable delay in settlement and disbursement thereof must be visited with the penalty of payment of interest at the current market rate till actual payment." ;