JUDGMENT : It appears that the defects pointed out by the office having been removed, this case was to be listed for admission, but has been wrongly listed under the heading for orders. It may be treated as listed for admission. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondents. The petitioner in this application has prayed for issuance of a direction to the respondents to pay him forthwith his retiral dues including gratuity, GPF, GSS, leave encashment, arrears of salary, arrears of pension, full pension and other admitted dues on the basis of the revised pay scale of the petitioner to which he is entitled. Such payment has been demanded from the date of retirement i.e. 30.9.2007. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was an employee under the respondent Board and retired on 30.9.2007 on the post of Head Clerk from the services of the Board. Thereafter, the petitioner submitted all the relevant documents for the purpose of assessing his retiral benefits payable to him. When the matter was delayed, the petitioner filed a representation on 31.10.2007 demanding payment. In response to the representation, the petitioner received a copy of the order (annexure 2 ) whereby he was informed that sanction for payment of leave encashment as well as payment of GPF and pension amount was given by the concerned authority of the respondents, petitioner’s grievance is that inspite of such sanction having being accorded, no payment has been made to the petitioner, except payment of 90% pension. No counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondents. From the annexures to the writ petition, it appears that the petitioner retired as Head Clerk under the respondent Board which has acknowledged its liability for payment of his retiral dues. The concerned authority of the respondents has also sanctioned payment of the retiral dues under various heads including payment of pension. It further appears that sanction for payment of 90% gratuity was also made in favour of the petitioner but as it appears, except payment of 90% pension amount, no other amount has been paid to him. The concerned authority of the respondents has also sanctioned payment of the retiral dues under various heads including payment of pension. It further appears that sanction for payment of 90% gratuity was also made in favour of the petitioner but as it appears, except payment of 90% pension amount, no other amount has been paid to him. Considering the above facts and circumstances, the petitioner may file a fresh representation before the concerned authority of the respondents within 15 days from the date of this order, annexing a copy of this order and within two months from the date of receipt of the representation, the concerned authority of the respondents shall consider the same and take an appropriate decision thereon by passing a reasoned and speaking order and effectively communicate such decision to the petitioner. If the respondents are satisfied of the petitioner’s claim, they shall assess the amount of retiral dues payable to the petitioner under the different heads as claimed by the petitioner and shall release such payment to the petitioner within one month from the decision taken on the petitioner’s representation. If within the stipulated period the amount of retiral dues is not paid to the petitioner, then such payable amount shall carry interest at the rate of 12 percent which will be paid from the date of retirement till final payment. With the above observation, this application is disposed of. Let a copy of this order be given to the learned counsel for the respondents.