JUDGMENT 1. - This writ petition has been filed with the prayer that the respondents be directed to treat the training period rendered by the petitioner between 11.9.1973 to 1.3.1974 and also the period of his absence of four months and ten days which was regularised by grant of extraordinary leave as part of qualifying service and they be further directed to accordingly revise his pension and other retiral dues and pay the arrears thereof together with interest @ 18% per annum. 2. Shri Reashm Bhargava, learned counsel for the petitioner at the outset submitted that he would not press the claim with regard to counting the period of absence which was regularised by grant of leave. However, he submits that so far as the training period is concerned, this controversy can be resolved by applying the order dated 20.8.05 passed by the respondents themselves by which it was directed that the period of training attended by the duly selected Inspectors of the Land and Building Tax Department should be treated as part of service. The copy of order dated 20.8.05 is on record at Annexure-13 and has not been denied by the respondents. 3. Even though the notice of the writ petition was issued to the respondents as far back as 12.4.2006, but so far no reply to the writ petition has been filed. 4. On the last date of hearing i.e. 16.2.2009, when the matter was listed before this Court, request was again made.for filling reply. This Court- observed that such a request at this distance of time was unreasonable. However, it the interest of justice, last opportunity of four weeks was granted to do so. Today also, no reply has been filed, but similar prayer has been made again, which cannot be accepted. 5. The order passed by the Government dated 20.8.05 is categorical on the point that for the Inspectors appointed in Land and Building Tax Department, their period of service shall be counted from the date of their selection. Thus the period of training has been held to be, countable towards qualifying period of service for grant of pension. The petitioner applying for grant of voluntary retirement on 24.10.2000 and by order dated 23.11.2000, his application was accepted and he was ordered to retire with effect from 31.12.2000. Thus the period of training has been held to be, countable towards qualifying period of service for grant of pension. The petitioner applying for grant of voluntary retirement on 24.10.2000 and by order dated 23.11.2000, his application was accepted and he was ordered to retire with effect from 31.12.2000. The Assistant Director Urban Land and Building Tax Department recommended his case for grant of retiral benefits on 24.8.2001 and the petitioner was eventually sanctioned provisional pension of Rs. 3,461/- by order dated 6.9.01 but his final pension was sanctioned in the sum of Rs. 3,962/- on 29.7.2004 and in doing so, the respondents did not count training period of the petitioner as qualifying service. The respondents passed the aforesaid order dated 20.8.2005 granting benefit of training period as part of qualifying service on account of the judgment of this Court dated 27.11.2001 passed in Sumer Singh Jakhad v. State & Ors. S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 939/1979 and another S.B Civil Writ Petition No. 8496/01 decided on 27.11.01 . There is no explanation why the delay of three years and seven months took place in making payment of retiral dues to the petitioner. 6. In the result, this writ petition is allowed. The respondents are directed to treat the training period of the service as part of qualifying service and accordingly recalculate his pension and other retiral dues and pay his consequential arrears. The respondents are also directed to pay to the petitioner interest @ 9% per annum in terms of Rajasthan Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1996 excluding the initial period of 60 days from the date of retirement. 7. Compliance of the judgement be made within a period of three months from the date certified copy of this order is produced before the respondents.Writ Petition Allowed. *******