ORDER Dr. D.K. SAHU, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) — The applicant retired as Sub-Junior Engineer with effect from 30.4.1999. He submitted required pension papers in the office of the Executive Engineer. PHD, Sambalpur on 18.12.1999 which was forwarded to respondent No.3 the Superintendent Engineer on 24.5.2000 with the remark in Col.20 that no demand certificate could be issued at present pending clearance of his charge papers. S.V.P. report etc. But no demand certificate has been submitted. So the applicant is debarred from some of the pensionary benefits. He made requests and representations for release of the same, but to no avail. He has thus filed this application for issuance of direction to the respondents to release his commuted value of pension and DCRG with interest. 2. Respondents No.2,3,4 and 5 have filed their joint written counter. It is submitted that no demand certificate has been issued in favour of the applicant due to SVP outstanding of an amount of Rs.1,04,180/- and audit for objection total amount¬ing to Rs.1,44,970/-. It is submitted that after lapse of more than three years from the date of retirement, an inspection was made by D.A.G. (works) Puri in the year 2003-04. Audit report was received by the E.E., PH division, Sambalpur vide letter at Annexure-C wherein it has been pointed out that there was short¬age of stock materials amounting to Rs.1,44,970/-. The applicant has been called upon to have his say in the matter. Subsequently no demand certificate was issued in favour of the applicant indicating the SVP discrepancy and audit report submitted by Accountant General, Orissa vide letter dated 19.3.2009. The applicant has not yet settled the discrepancy and audit report. 3. It appears from the relief sought for mentioned as in para-7 of the original application that the commutted value of pension and the DCRG of the applicant have been held up. From the subsequent application dated 23.3.2009, it appears that he seeks interest at the rate of 18% per annum from 16.12.1999 till 18.3.2009 on the amount of Rs.1,48,491/- towards commutation of pension. The documents annexed thereto reveal that commuted amount of his pension has been granted in his favour and so he wants only interest thereon for delayed release/pension. 4. From the subsequent application dated 23.3.2009, it appears that he seeks interest at the rate of 18% per annum from 16.12.1999 till 18.3.2009 on the amount of Rs.1,48,491/- towards commutation of pension. The documents annexed thereto reveal that commuted amount of his pension has been granted in his favour and so he wants only interest thereon for delayed release/pension. 4. Counter of the respondents reveals that there was discrepancy in stock verification report and objections have been raised in audit for which the DCRG to the aforesaid amount of the applicant has been held up. 5. Rule 68(1) of OCS (Pension) Rule 1992 empowers the authority to held up or deduct the government dues from the DCRG amount. The word government dues have been explained in sub-rule 3 thereof. The value of discrepancy of materials in the store or shortage of materials in the stock has not been explained therein as a government due. The discrepancy of store and stock or matter relating to audit objection do not constitute a government due, so these cannot be held up or recovered from the gratuity amount of an employee. It is apparent from the counter and letter of Annexure-C that the audit was held or stock verification was made after the retirement of the applicant. So there was no report or allegation of discrepancy on the date of report of the applicant. Further no proceeding as per rule has been initiated against the applicant fixing responsibility on him for such shortage discrep¬ancy in stock store materials nor on the audit report. In the circumstances, the respondents have no reason to hold up or to recover the aforesaid amount from the applicant out of his DCRG amount. However, the government is within their power to recover its dues in accordance with law, but the aforesaid amount cannot be recovered from the DCRG under rule 68 of Pension Rule 1992. 6. As regards the claim of interest for delayed sanction and payment of commutation value of pension, the applicant has been getting full amount of provisional pension/pension in every month. In case of commutation of pension, a certain amount from monthly pension has to be deducted for a particular period. So, sanction of commuted value of obviously his pension amount has to be reduced. The applicant had already received full pension amount in every month without deduction of commutation amount. In case of commutation of pension, a certain amount from monthly pension has to be deducted for a particular period. So, sanction of commuted value of obviously his pension amount has to be reduced. The applicant had already received full pension amount in every month without deduction of commutation amount. He had occasion to get interest on that amount if deposited or would have been deposited in a bank. So the applicant had occasion to get interest on the said amount and now again he claims interest. He cannot claim two interest. So his claim to get interest on commuted value is not sustainable. 7. Respondents are therefore directed to release and disburse the entire DCRG amount and other retrial benefits to the applicant in accordance with rule if not already released and disbursed the same within three months from communication of this order, thus failing which it will carry interest at the rate of 9% per annum from to-day till its payment. The O.A. is thus disposed of accordingly. No order as to cost. O.A. disposed of.