HC clears confusion over payment of interest on pension for ex-Shanbhougues, Patawaries

NT Correspondent

Bengaluru:

A Division Bench of the High Court of Karnataka has cleared the confusion over payment of interest on the pension paid to retired Shanbhougues and Patawaries (village accountants). It has said that the interest has been ordered because the Revenue Department delayed the payment of pension. It upheld an earlier Tribunal order which had sanctioned 12% interest on the pensions. The Revenue Department and the Accountant General had challenged the awarding of interest on pension to Smamarao, 78 and Pralhadrao, 88, from Kalburagi.

The two had approached the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal in 1999 seeking release of retrial benefits with interest. On September 24, 2003, the Tribunal allowed the applications and directed the State to settle their pension with interest of 12% per annum. The State approached the HC with a petition in 2004 challenging the Tribunal’s order. This was dismissed. When the State did not pay interest on these benefits, the two along with a few other retired village accountants approached the Tribunal again in 2016.

The Tribunal again ruled that they were entitled to be paid the interest. The State filed a petition again in the HC in 2021. The Division Bench of Justice Sreenivas Harish Kum a r a n d Justice TG Shivashankare Gowda heard the petition and gave their judgment recently. The HC said that it cannot accept the arguments advanced on behalf of the Government for not paying the interest. “We have perused the order of the Tribunal.  

In Para 23 of the said order there is a clear direction that because of delay in making payment of pension to the Ex-Shanbhogues the Government should pay interest at the rate of 12%,” the HC said. The Bench further said that “The writ petitions filed before the High Court challenging the order of the Tribunal were dismissed. Once the writ petitions stood dismissed, it means the direction of the Tribunal to pay interest was confirmed.” Dismissing the State’s petition and ordering the payment of interest, the HC said, “If according to the State, interest is not payable, it could have sought clarification from the Division Bench which decided the (earlier) Writ Petition and connected petitions or a review petition could have been filed.