JUDGMENT : Kurian Joseph, J. Respondent-Corporation has come up in appeal against the judgment, dated 16th June, 2011 in CWP No. 8543 of 2010. The petitioner approached this Court praying for a direction to the Corporation for release of the entire gratuity. He retired from service on 31st July, 2008. However, in his case 25% of the gratuity has to be paid. On 22nd March, 2012, this Court passed the following order:- "The appellant will make available the latest instruction issued by the Government with regard to the payment of gratuity. It shall be clarified as to whether any person who retired alongwith or prior to the petitioner has been released full gratuity. It shall also be clarified as to whether in the case of an employee who retired recently has been granted full gratuity." 2. Learned counsel, on instruction, submits that in the case of those who retired between 01.01.2006 and 01.01.2009, the balance 25% gratuity has to be released. However, it is also informed, on instruction, that in the case of those who retired after 30th September, 2009, the entire gratuity has been paid. In the matter of payment of gratuity, there cannot be such a distinction between who retired prior to September, 2009 and those who retired after September, 2009. In case the corporation is in a position to pay gratuity to those who retired after September, 2009, we do not find any reason for denying the same treatment in the case of those who retired prior to 5.2.2009. Such classification is violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. This classification is unfair and unreasonable, since people who retired earlier are derived the benefits whereas the recent retirees are paid the full benefits. The contention of the appellant is that they follow the Government instructions, but in principle, the Government instruction is only with respect to those Corporations or bodies, who are facing financial crunch. Since full gratuity is now being paid, it cannot be said that there is crunch to that extent Therefore, the view taken by the learned Single Judge to release the gratuity on or before 31st July, 2011 is a plausible and reasonable view and we do not find any infirmity or illegality in the order so as to interfere in appeal. Hence, the appeal is dismissed. Hence, the appeal is dismissed. However, the direction to pay interest at the rate of 9% per annum from July 31, 2011 is vacated since the delay is on account of pendency of the appeal. We, however, make it clear that in case full gratuity is not released within a month from today, the respondent-petitioner will be entitled to interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of filing of the writ petition and the officer(s) responsible for the delay shall be personally liable for the same. In case the interest is thus paid by the Corporation, the matter will be informed to the Accountant General for further action. 3. The appeal is disposed of, so also the pending application(s), if any.