Gujarat High Court warns of serious consequences if State departments delay paying dues to employees

The Chief Justice of Gujarat High Court Justice Arvind Kumar on Friday pulled up the State Departments for not complying with the orders of the court within the stipulated time and thereby wasting the State’s funds by paying interest on. The court was hearing a series of contempt petitions filed by sever retired employees of irrigation department, State of Gujarat who despite having been granted gratuity, leave encashment and a fixed pension by the High Court in 2019 had still not been paid.

On 5th January, 2021, the then Chief Justice of Gujarat Justice Vikram Nath had passed an order stating

"Any further delay on part of the State would only incur further financial burden on the State as there is an order of payment of interest at the rate of 6% if payment is not made within the time prescribed by the learned Single Judge. Admittedly, said time has already expired long back. It would be therefore in the interest of the State that the payment is made at the earliest."

However, from the court proceedings, it appeared that the the dues had still not been cleared and the State was incurring an interest of 6% .

The Chief Justice called the Advocate General Manish Trivedi to the court and said “We are sorry to note that in contempt certain officials in connivance with the complaints are swindling the government! The interest is not small, it is running in lakhs and crores. This is a possibility! In this case, the court had granted 8 weeks to the department to pay the dues and if not six percent interest was chargeable,” the CJ said. The CJ further pointed out that a reply affidavit is filed dated 9th February 2021 saying that the order has already been complied.

The CJI said “A rejoinder affidavit has been filed by the petitioner herein which says both the interest and the principle amount has not been paid! Then they rely upon an order by the authority dated 18th October 2021, in this order there is no computation of interest.” The CJ pointed out that in the first order they have complied, now they are saying they have not complied. The CJ pointed out further that in the latest affidavit there is a component of interest to be paid which runs to over 15 lakhs the CJ said.

The CJ said “The reason is this, these official use the order of the court as an umbrella. Now they should be held responsible. Why should the State lose money on account of the lax of the officials.” The CJ pointed out that that the departments have been filing multiple affidavits running into pages and pages however many of them do not give the actual picture. The CJ said “Otherwise we will have to summon your secretaries in contempt matter.”

The AG agreed that this show that we could have saved a lot of money and agreed to the apprehension of the CJ. The CJ said “We are just pointing out the tip of the ice berg. The money paid as interest merely because of non-compliance may run into tens of crores.” The CJ pointed out that the department had filed an affidavit stating that the order of the court has been complied with in February itself, however in their affidavit filed in November. It is apparent that they are paying interest.

The court was hearing a contempt petition filed by the employees of a Government of Gujarat department. When the court noticed such discrepancies the court passed an order saying “This court has repeatedly notice that in contempt petitions filed against the court against the State, the affidavits filed by the Department are not only vague but also lack minimum required particulars. The present case is a classic example. Hence, we make it clear that hencforth in all contempt petitions, the secretaries of the department shall be present. From Monday onwards, the secretaries of the all the departments SHALL be present.”

The counsel for the department however persuaded the court not to pass this. The court on hearing the submissions asked the counsel to get the Advocate General of Gujarat Manish Trivedi. On being persuaded by the Advocate General not to pass such an order, the court retracted the same.

Case title: Tarun Kumar Girija Shankar Vs MM Jadhav or his successor in office.