JUDGMENT 1. - Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. The petitioner, a widow of one Asha Ram Sharma, aged 84 years, is before this Court claiming interest on the delayed payment of pension/family pension on account of her husband serving the medical & Health Department of the State Government after the first round of litigation went up to Apex Court where the petitioner succeeded in securing her right of pension and accordingly the arrears of pension of Rs. 2,69,942/- were paid to the petitioner on 20.12.2005, however, a sum of Rs. 20,000/- was deducted out of that sum for no valid reasons, which Rs. 20,000/- also came to be paid to the petitioner on 26.09.2006. These facts are not disputed by the respondents. 3. The husband of the petitioner was working as male nurse of 'palace dispensary', which was taken over by the Government of Rajasthan upon integration of 'Marwar State' and merged with the State of Rajasthan in the year 1949 after the independence. The petitioner's husband sought voluntary retirement from the Government service on 28.03.1952, however, he later on expired. The pension case of the petitioner for grant of pension to her husband/family pension to which she was entitled, as widow of deceased Asha Ram Sharma, was not finalised for all the years then petitioner approached this Court by filing writ petition being SBCWP No. 2425 of 2000, Smt. Shankuntla v. State & Ors., which came to be allowed by this Court on 14.01.2005 . The operative portion of the said judgment's reproduced herein below : "Therefore, the writ petition of the petitioner is allowed. The respondents are directed to finalise the case of the pension of the petitioner within a period of two months from today and forward the necessary papers to the concerned authorities and the concerned authorities shall provide the actual benefits to the petitioner within a period of 15 days after the receipt of the necessary papers from the employer-department." 4. The appeals filed by the State before the Division Bench of this Court and Hon'ble the Supreme Court failed. This is how the arrears of pension were paid vide Annex-3 PPO No. 400446 dated 14.12.2005 and the aforesaid sums were paid to the petitioner. 5. The appeals filed by the State before the Division Bench of this Court and Hon'ble the Supreme Court failed. This is how the arrears of pension were paid vide Annex-3 PPO No. 400446 dated 14.12.2005 and the aforesaid sums were paid to the petitioner. 5. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner only for the limited claim of awarding of interest @ 12% per annum from the date when the pension became due till the date of payment. A reply to the writ petition has been filed on behalf of respondent-Medical & Health Department and it is stated that since payment has been made to the petitioner after the litigation was finalised by the Apex Court, however, she is not entitled to any interest as there was no deliberate delay in payment of pension after the petitioner succeeded in the litigation. 6. Having heard learned counsels for the parties and upon going through the pleadings of the case, this Court is of the view that there is no substance in the contention raised on behalf of respondents, that right of pension of the petitioner as well as her husband accrued to them way back in the year 1952 when husband of the petitioner sought voluntary retirement on 28.03.1952. Rule 89 (i) of the Rajasthan Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1996 as substituted in the year 2001 reads as under : "89. Interest on delayed payment of retiral benefits: (i) Except in exceptional circumstances, if the payments of retiral benefits has been authorised after 60 days from the date when its payment became due, and it is clearly established that the delay in payment was not on account of failure on the part of the Government servant to comply with the procedure laid down in this Chapter or elsewhere in these rules, interest @ 12% per annum for the period beyond 60 days after retiral benefits become due would be payable till the end of the month preceding the month in which the retiral benefits are authorised." 7. The directions of this Court, reproduced above, were confirmed by the Apex Court, whereby the respondents were directed to finalise the pension case of the petitioner and pay her dues. The fact that the respondents thus computed the arrears of pension vide PPO order (Annex-3) on record, and paid aforesaid sum of Rs. 2,69,942/- on 20.12.2005 and Rs. The directions of this Court, reproduced above, were confirmed by the Apex Court, whereby the respondents were directed to finalise the pension case of the petitioner and pay her dues. The fact that the respondents thus computed the arrears of pension vide PPO order (Annex-3) on record, and paid aforesaid sum of Rs. 2,69,942/- on 20.12.2005 and Rs. 20,000/- on 26.09.2006 clearly shows that claim of the petitioner about pension is not even in dispute. The only question is whether such pension deserves to be paid to the petitioner with interest or without interest. Since, the respondents paid the retiral benefits without interest to which also the petitioner was also entitled as per Rule 89 (i), therefore, the petitioner had to undertaken the second round of litigation before this court by way of this writ petition. 8. It is indeed unfortunate that the respondents drove the petitioner for this second round of litigation as they failed to take notice of their own rule particularly Rule 89 (1) of the Rules of 1996 which clearly envisaged after the retirement of a Government employee, pension became due to the petitioner and unless paid within sixty days of such due, had to bear the interest @ 12% per annum, therefore, the petitioner is clearly entitled to this interest @ 12% per annum right from 1952 till the date of payment. 9. Accordingly, this writ petition is also allowed and the respondents are directed to compute said amount of interest due to the petitioner in terms of Rule 89 (i) of the Rules of 1996, quoted above, and pay the same within a period of three months from today positively. The respondents shall pay cost of Rs. 2000/- to be paid by the State Government. The application (IA No. 14688/09) is accordingly disposed of.Writ Petition Allowed. *******