Mridula Mishra, J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing for the respondents. Present case is the glaring example of negligent attitude of the respondent State in the matter of making payment of retiral dues to an unfortunate lady whose husband died in harness on 2.6.1982 but despite continuous efforts till date neither family pension nor death-cum-retirement dues of her husband has been paid to her. The petitioner is the widow who made several representations before each and every authority and failing on all fronts she has filed this application for a direction to the respondents to make payment of all retiral dues of her late husband and also for making payment of family pension as well as arrears of pension to her.

2. A counter affidavit has been filed by respondent Nos. 1 to 3 as also by respondent No. 4. In both the counter affidavits it has been stated that after they came to know about the filing of the writ application by the petitioner, they started making all efforts for redressal of the grievances of the petitioner. They have been able to make payment of all retiral dues of the petitioner.

3. Undoubtedly after filing of the writ application all the dues of the petitioner has been paid for which she is legally entitled. The serious as well as sorrowful aspect of this matter is that the authorities in a government department are so ignorant that they have no information regarding the death of one of their employees who was working in their office. The husband of the petitioner died on 2.6.1982 and till date the respondents authorities were not aware that one of such employee who was working in Class-IV or Class-III has died and his legal heirs are entitled for his retiral dues and his widow is entitled for the family pension. I find that the employees who are working in Class-Ill or Class-IV posts, they are never paid their retiral dues unless they approach this Court specially if an employee dies in harness then the condition of his legal heirs becomes pitiable and their grievance is never redressed unless they approach the High Court by filing the writ application. This is a case in which the petitioner is entitled for statutory as well as penal interest.

4. in the facts and circumstances it is directed that the petitioner must be paid interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of death of her husband till the date of payment of all retiral dues. She must also be paid Rs. 1,000/- as cost. Both the interest as well as the cost be paid to the petitioner within two weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.

5. Counsel for the petitioner submits that there is miscalculation in the interest of G.P.F. amount. In that view of the matter, the petitioner may represent her case before the authority concerned for calculation of interest of G.P.F. amount and the authority concerned is directed to take up the grievance of the petitioner promptly and if the grievance of the petitioner is found to be genuine the same must be paid to the petitioner within two weeks thereafter. With the aforesaid direction/observation, this application is disposed of.