Shree Chandrashekhar, J. - (1.) Prayer in the writ-petition is for payment of statutory interest on the amount of retiral dues, arrears of pension etc. which were paid to the petitioner about 13 years after the death of his father.
(2.) Admittedly, in the service excerpts of the employee namely, Pritam Singh Virdi, petitioner's name does not find place. It is also an admitted position that GPF, Leave encashment and Gratuity amounts have been paid to the petitioner on 16.08.2007 and arrears of pension on 21.08.2007. Plea taken by the petitioner is, that Miss Jagjeet Kaur who claimed herself legal guardian of the petitioner submitted a claim on behalf of the petitioner on 01.03.1994. On this, stand taken by the respondents is that without verifying the persons who could have claimed post-retiral benefits on death of the employee-Pritam Singh Virdi, claim of the petitioner could not have been processed. It is stated that till the postretiral benefits were paid to the petitioner he had not submitted succession certificate, however, in compliance of order passed by this Court in W.P.(S) No.3755 of 2005 and Contempt (Civil) Case No.947 of 2005, postretiral benefits accrued on death of late Pritam Singh Virdi were paid to the petitioner.
(3.) In the above facts, I find that the delay caused in payment of post-retiral benefits to the petitioner was not intentional rather, procedural due to absence of nomination of the petitioner by the employee-Pritam Singh Virdi and in absence of his name in the service excerpts of the said employee.;