ORDER : S.N. Variava, J. This appeal is filed against an order of the Delhi High Court dated 20-4-2004. 2. Briefly stated the facts are as follows : the respondent admittedly gave information regarding clandestine import of machinery without payment of duty by M/s J.K. Synthetics Ltd. As a result of his information, the Department was able to establish import and levy duty in a sum of Rs 1,21,37,611 and with penalty and interest in a sum of Rs 2,50,00,000. It is not disputed that the adjudication proceedings have ended in favour of the Department. The levy of duty as well as interest and penalty have been confirmed by the Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal (CEGAT). No appeal has been filed by M/s J.K. Synthetics Ltd. against the order of CEGAT. Therefore that order has become final. 3. It appears that initially, on 23-6-1998, a sum of Rs. 6 lakhs was paid to the respondent pursuant to the reward policy of the Government dated 30-3-1985. As no further amounts were paid by way of reward in spite of numerous letters, the respondent filed a writ petition in the High Court. 4. The High Court has, by the impugned order, directed the payment of final reward amount in terms of the policy. It was further directed that the reward amount will be paid within 15 days from the date on which a copy of the High Court order is produced, with interest @15% p.a., failing which the amount shall be paid with interest @18% p.a. and the additional 3% was to be borne by a responsible officer who did not take immediate action. The High Court has also directed payment of Rs. 10,000 as costs. 5. Pursuant to the directions of the High Court, a Rewards Committee was constituted. The Committee, at its meeting held on 11-5-2004 decided that total compensation payable was Rs. 9.5 lakhs. Accordingly, in May 2004 another sum of Rs. 3.5 lakhs was paid to the respondent. Thereafter, this special leave petition has been filed by the appellants. Leave was granted on 16-11-2004 and it has reached for final hearing today. 6. In our view, as the Committee has concluded that a sum of Rs. 9.5 lakhs was payable and that amount has been paid, we see no substance in the challenge to the impugned order. It is the Committee which has decided that Rs. Leave was granted on 16-11-2004 and it has reached for final hearing today. 6. In our view, as the Committee has concluded that a sum of Rs. 9.5 lakhs was payable and that amount has been paid, we see no substance in the challenge to the impugned order. It is the Committee which has decided that Rs. 9.5 lakhs is payable. To that extent the appellants cannot have any grievance. We are not concerned with and do not go into the question whether the sum of Rs. 9.5 lakhs can be said to be in compliance with the impugned order. 7. We are told that a contempt petition has been taken out in the High Court. It is for the High Court to decide whether there is any contempt. We clarify that dismissal of this appeal will, in no way, affect the contention of the parties in the contempt petition. This order will not mean that this Court has accepted that Rs. 9.5 lakhs was the compensation payable nor that this Court is accepting that a higher amount is payable. 8. However, considering the fact that it has been held by this Court in Union of India v. C. Krishna Reddy, (2003) 12 SCC 627 , as well as in Union of India v. R. Padmanabhan, (2003) 7 SCC 270 , and in the reward scheme that there is no vested right in the person to claim a reward and that the payment can, at the highest, be an ex gratia payment, there is absolutely no justification to grant interest on such ex gratia payment. 9. We, therefore, set aside the portion of the High Court order where the interest is directed to be paid as well as the portion awarding costs. 10. Save as above, we see no reason to interfere. The civil appeal stands dismissed. Appeal dismissed.