Order Heard counsel for the parties. 2. The petitioner in this writ application has prayed for a direction upon the respondents to pay him the following benefits: (A) Gratuity. (B) Remaining 10% of the pension from the date of retirement. (C) Leave Encashment for 300 days. (D) Delay Interest @ 12% per annum on the admitted retiral dues. (E) To restrain the respondents from deducting a sum of Rs.74,507/from the petitioner's retiral dues. (F) Other legal entitlements. 3. From the rival submissions the admitted facts are that the petitioner had retired from service under the respondent JSEB on 31.5.2007. After his retirement, excepting fixing 90% of his pension, the respondents did not release and pay other retiral benefits like Gratuity and other retiral dues. On the other hand, by an impugned letter dated 30.11.2007 issued after about six months from the petitioner's retirement, the respondents had intimated the petitioner that he is liable to refund a sum of Rs.74,507/- which he had allegedly received by way of excess payment and that such amount will be deducted from his retiral benefits. 4. The petitioner while challenging the aforesaid order, had filed a writ application on a previous occasion for the same relief. After hearing the matter, this Court had directed the respondents to consider the petitioner's case and pass an appropnate order. In response, the respondents have passed an order dated 30.1.2010 explaining therein that the petitioner had received excess payments by way of increments in his pay scale from 21.8.1982, such excess payments having been obtained by him for about three years, therefore the respondent are entitled to realize the excess paid amounts calculated at Rs. 74,507/- from the petitioner's retiral benefits. 5. As regards the other entitlements, it is explained by the respondents that after having fixed 90% of the provisional pension, the same is being paid to the petitioner and the remaining 10% alongwith gratuity, has been sanctioned by the Board Headquarters. Though the amount of 10% of the pension and gratuity amount has not been paid to the petitioner. It is further stated that the petitioner has been paid Rs.62,614/- towards Group Saving Scheme and another sum of Rs.8.49.465/ - towards GPF final withdrawal. The petitioner has also been paid a sum of Rs.1.28.424/- towards leave encashment. 6. Though the amount of 10% of the pension and gratuity amount has not been paid to the petitioner. It is further stated that the petitioner has been paid Rs.62,614/- towards Group Saving Scheme and another sum of Rs.8.49.465/ - towards GPF final withdrawal. The petitioner has also been paid a sum of Rs.1.28.424/- towards leave encashment. 6. From the above facts, as it appears, no specific reason has been assigned as to why the amount of gratuity has been withheld from payment and why the remaining amount of 10% of the pension, in spite of sanction being made, has not been paid. 7. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that the petitioner has not vacated the Board's quarter as yet. However learned counsel concedes that this in itself may not be a ground for withholding the payment of gratuity amount. The Board, under the such circumstances, is not only entitled to recover the normal rent but penal rent also for overstay in the quarter. 8. As regards the order for deducting a sum of Rs.74,507/- which has been allegedly drawn by the petitioner by way of excess payment, from the admitted facts it appears that such amount of excess payment for a period of three years is claimed to have been drawn by the petitioner way back in the year 1982-85. The respondents have not offered any reason as •to why during the entire period, prior to the date of petitioner's retirement in May, 2007, no effort has been made to realize the alleged excess payments from the petitioner's salary. It also appears that before passing the order for realizing the amount, no prior notice was given to the petitioner to explain as to why the amount should not be realized from him. There is no allegation that the excess payments even if received by the petitioner, was by way of practicing fraud or misrepresentation. Having allowed the petitioner to draw the amount and having remained inert for more than 25 years, the respondents cannot possibly proceed to realize any amount on the plea that such amount has been drawn by the petitioner by way of excess payment. The impugned order of recovery of a sum of Rs.74,507/- cannot be sustained and therefore is hereby quashed. The impugned order of recovery of a sum of Rs.74,507/- cannot be sustained and therefore is hereby quashed. The respondent Board is directed to realize the amount of gratuity, the balance of the 10% pension amount and also refund a sum of Rs.74,507/-, if the amount has already been recovered from the petitioner's retiral benefits. The aforesaid amount shall be paid by the respondent Board within two months from the date of this order. Since the respondents have not been able to inform as to any genuine reason for withholding the payment of gratuity, the amount of gratuity shall carry interest @ 12% per annum, to be calculated from the date when the amount was due for payment, till the date of final payment. The respondent Board shall be at liberty to realize rent for the quarter retained by the petitioner for the period of unauthorized occupation and if the Rules permit, may realize penal rent for the same. With these observations, this writ application is disposed of. Let a copy of this order be given to the counsel for the respondent Jharkhand State Electricity Board.