JUDGMENT : K.T. Sankaran, J. The petitioner, while working as Professor and Head of the Department of Hindi in Sree Sankaracharya University of Sanskrit, retired on 31.8.2009 by availing Voluntary Retirement Scheme. The grievance of the petitioner is that his pensionary benefits have not been disbursed till date. 2. The reliefs prayed for in the Writ Petition are the following: "(a) Issue a Mandamus or any other appropriate Order or Direction, directing the respondent University to release the pension and other terminal benefits in the revised UGC scale to the Petitioner expeditiously, within a time frame fixed by this Hon'ble Court; (b) Declare that the Petitioner is entitled for interest @ 12% for the delayed payment of pension; (c) To grant such other appropriate relief to the petitioner as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice. (d) To award costs to the Petitioner." 3. In the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the first respondent, the defence taken is the following: "The further claim in paragraph 2 that the petitioner has submitted all the required documents for sanction of pension including his Pension Passbook to the University is not fully correct. He has submitted only the Pension Passbook. He has not taken steps to get his Service Book and other service particulars forwarded to the University by the Director of Collegiate Education. The Director of Collegiate Education, who keeps the Service Book and other service particulars of the petitioner, has not forwarded the same to the University. Without the Director of Collegiate Education forwarding to the University the Service Book and other service details of the petitioner, the University is not in a position to process the retirement benefits of the petitioner." 4. Based on the contention raised by the respondents, the following order dated 26.11.2010 was passed: "The petitioner exercised voluntary retirement, while working as the Head of the Department in Hindi of Sree Sankaracharya University of Sanskrit. His grievance is that the terminal benefits have not been disbursed by the University. The University takes the stand that until they get the service book of the petitioner from the Director of Collegiate Education, the University would not be in a position to finalise the pension claims. It is stated that the petitioner was working under the Collegiate Education Department for considerable number of years. The University takes the stand that until they get the service book of the petitioner from the Director of Collegiate Education, the University would not be in a position to finalise the pension claims. It is stated that the petitioner was working under the Collegiate Education Department for considerable number of years. It is pointed out that without the junction of the Director of Collegiate Education as a party in the Writ Petition, no effective disposal of the Writ Petition would be possible. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the University. In the facts and circumstances, I am of the view that in order to issue a direction to the Director of Collegiate Education to forward the service book to the first respondent University, it is necessary to implead the Director of Collegiate Education as an additional respondent in the Writ Petition. The petitioner shall take necessary steps to implead the Director of Collegiate Education as an additional respondent. Post after the impleading petition is filed." 5. Later, the petitioner filed I.A.No.17439 of 2010 to implead the Director of Collegiate Education as additional third respondent. The application is hereby allowed. Learned Government Pleader takes notice for the Director of Collegiate Education. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the Director of Collegiate Education has already forwarded the service book in respect of the petitioner and this is clear from the letter dated 18.11.2010 issued by the Registrar to the Accountant General with copy to the petitioner. The original of the letter dated 18.11.2010 received by the petitioner was produced for perusal and the same is taken on record. 7. The Standing Counsel appearing for the University submitted that the Accountant General has furnished the service details of the petitioner for the period from 12.6.1976 to 4.4.1998, subsequent to the filing of the counter affidavit. 8. In view of the subsequent developments, there is no impediment for granting the pensionary benefits to the petitioner. In the facts and circumstances, the Writ Petition is disposed of as follows: i. The first respondent shall disburse the pension and other terminal benefits including Death-cum-Retirement Gratuity to the petitioner, as expeditiously as possible and, at any rate, within a period of three months from today. ii. In the facts and circumstances, the Writ Petition is disposed of as follows: i. The first respondent shall disburse the pension and other terminal benefits including Death-cum-Retirement Gratuity to the petitioner, as expeditiously as possible and, at any rate, within a period of three months from today. ii. If the first respondent finds that the petitioner has any liability to discharge, the same can be adjusted towards the DCRG. However, before finalising the liability, the petitioner shall be afforded an effective opportunity of being heard. iii. If the first respondent disburses the pensionary benefits as mentioned above to the petitioner within three months from today, no interest need be paid to the petitioner. On the other hand, if the first respondent fails to pay the said amount within three months from today, the defaulted amounts will carry interest at 12% per annum from the date of voluntary retirement, namely, 31.8.2009, to the date of payment. iv. Any amount already paid to the petitioner towards the pensionary benefits can be deducted from the amount payable to the petitioner as DCRG.