Ranchi, May 22: Angered by the high number of cases on retirement dues, the Jharkhand High Court has pulled up the state government for delaying payment of superannuation benefits to employees or their family members.

Justice R.K. Merathia, while deciding a case on the payment of retirement dues to the widow of an employee of the human resource development department, ruled that all senior department officials should henceforth follow the policy of “pay or say”.

The judge mentioned in his order that senior officials should be accountable and responsible for payment of dues to superannuated employees of the department concerned.

“Cases related to payment of retirement benefits should be examined by superior officials of the department every month. All legally payable dues should be paid within the time frame,” Justice Merathia said.

The court also warned the state government that it would pass strictures against erring officials who purposely delayed payment to retired employees.

The bench made it clear that if payments weren’t made within reasonable time and valid explanations not provided, then the salary of those withholding payment would be stopped with immediate effect. The guilty officials would also be liable to pay the penal interest that would be charged from their individual salaries, the judge added.

Merathia also hinted at a possible nexus between some department officials who, he alleged, were hand in glove with retired employees. He said they delayed payments only to earn extra interest which was perhaps being shared between the two.

The matter had come up before the High Court in a petition filed by Indu Devi seeking payment of retirement dues of her husband, the late B.K. Mandal, who was an employee of the HRD department and had died on 23 December, 2000.

Today, the court directed the department to ensure that payments were made at the earliest and asked it to file an affidavit in the matter.

What irked the court was that the human resources department had been earlier directed to clear her late husband’s dues within six weeks.

But neither did its officials comply, nor did the state government provide a reason for the delay.