1 2025:CGHC:49297 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 1057 of 2023 1 - Satyanarayan Patel S/o Late Lalit Ram Patel Aged About 64 Years R/o Village Kotba, Tahsil Paththalgaon, District Jashpur Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, School Education Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Capital Complex, Naya Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh 2 - Accountant General (Lekha Evam Hakdari) Zero Point, Near Avinash Garden City, Baloda Bazar Road, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh 3 - District Treasury Officer Office At V4gr Wv5, Purani Toli, Jashpur Nagar, District Jashpur Chhattisgarh RAGHVENDRA JAT Digitally signed by RAGHVENDRA JAT 2 4 - District Education Officer Officer At V4jp Wv5, Purani Toli, Jashpur Nagar District Jashpur Chhattisgarh 5 - Block Education Officer Paththalgaon, Office At Near Bus Stand Paththalgaon, District Jashpur Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vaibhav A. Goverdhan, Advocate. For Respondent/State : Mr. Ankur Kashay, Dy. G.A. For Respondent(s) No. 2 : Mr. Raj Kumar Gupta, Advocate. Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 25/09/2025 1. By way of this petition, the petitioner has prayed for following reliefs:- “10.1] That, the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ / writs, order/orders, direction/directions to the respondent authorities and the impugned order dated 04.11.2022 (Anne.P-1), passed by the respondent no. 5 may kindly be quashed, in the interest of justice. 10.2] That, the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ/writs, order/orders, direction/directions to the respondent authorities for giving interest on the GPF amount, at the rate of 12% PA, to the petitioner, from 3 October 2021 to October 2022, in the interest of justice. 10.3] Any other relief which this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper.” 2. Brief facts of the case, is that, the petitioner, through the instant writ petition, challenges the order passed by Respondent No. 5 dated 04.11.2022, whereby the petitioner was denied interest on his retiral dues. The petitioner’s claim was rejected on the ground that a retired employee is entitled to interest only up to the last working day and not thereafter. Annexure P-1 is the copy of the impugned order dated 04.11.2022. The petitioner retired on 30.04.2021 from the post of Upper Division Teacher at Government Middle School, Amatoli, District Jashpur (CG), upon attaining the age of superannuation. Subsequently, on 28.10.2021, Respondent No. 2 issued an entitlement certificate for the petitioner’s GPF amount, calculating interest up to October 2021, totaling Rs. 14,53,639/-. However, despite the certificate, the GPF amount was not released immediately, and after considerable delay and persuasion, it was paid only in October 2022, nearly one year later. The petitioner was therefore entitled to interest for this delayed period. At the time of retirement, no departmental inquiry was pending, nor were any dues outstanding against the petitioner, so there was no reason for withholding the GPF payment. After the delayed payment, the 4 petitioner requested Respondent No. 5 for interest on the delayed payment, which was denied on the basis that the employee is not entitled to interest after the retirement date. The impugned order is therefore illegal, arbitrary, erroneous, and contrary to law, and is liable to be quashed, prompting this petition. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner respectfully submits that there has been an undue delay in the payment of the General Provident Fund (GPF) amount due to the petitioner. He further contends that, in light of this delay, the petitioner is entitled to receive interest on the outstanding sum. It is specifically submitted that interest should be granted at the rate of 10% per annum as a matter of right and equity. Consequently, this petition has been filed seeking appropriate relief in the form of payment of the principal GPF amount along with the interest accrued thereon at the aforementioned rate. 4. On the other hand learned counsel for the respondents opposes the same. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the fact that so far as the GPF is concerned as per the State Counsel the interest has been added, this Court only 5 orders that the said GPF may be verified by the Petitioner whether the amount of GPF payable to the employee interest has been added to the said amount from date of retirement till the date of actual payment. In case the interest has been paid till the date of payment there would not be any further interest to be paid by the Respondents. If the interest has not been calculated till the date of payment the Respondents are required to pay interest on the GPF amount also at the rate of 9% per annum from the date when the petitioner is required to be given interest on GPF due to delayed payment. The said exercise be completed within a period of 60 days. 7. With the aforesaid observation the present writ petition stands allowed and disposed of. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Raghu Jat