ORDER : Leave granted. 2. We have heard Mr. Amrit Lal Mehta, appellant in person and Mr. Paras Kuhad, learned Additional Solicitor General for the respondents. 3. The appeal has a chequered history. The appellant's grievance is that the respondent No. 1 has arbitrarily withheld reward which became due to him under the reward policy framed by the government for the information supplied by him. There are 7 decisions by the Reward Committees. The appellant for redressal of his grievance had approached the High Court twice in writ jurisdiction and once he filed contempt petition. The respondent No. 1 approached this Court earlier against the order of the Delhi High Court dated 20.4.2004. This time, the appeal has been preferred by the informer against the order of the Delhi High Court whereby the matter has been remanded to the Reward Committee to consider afresh the rewards awarded vide minutes dated 26.3.2009 and 10.3.2010. 4. It is not necessary to give the facts in detail. Suffice it to say that on the information given by the appellant, the Customs Department has been able to discover evasion of duty by the company, M/s. J.K. Synthetics Limited, and the department has been able to recover customs duty to the tune of Rs. 1.21 crores and penalty thereon in the sum of Rs. 2.5 crores. 5. In pursuance of various decisions by the Reward Committees, the appellant has been paid by now Rs. 50 lacs. Consequent upon the impugned judgment, the Reward Committee has reconsidered the matter. The minutes of the 7th Reward Committee dated 24.4.2012 have been placed on record by the respondents. Paragraphs 8 & 9 of the minutes read as under:- “8. The Committee independently examined all the facts of the case. The total recovery made in this case of Rs. 371.35 lakh and the reward sanctioned to the informer of Rs. 46.25 lakh works out to 12.46% of the total recoveries made. 9. In view of the foregoing and in respectful compliance with the Hon'ble Delhi High Court's aforementioned order, the Committee is of the opinion that the maximum amount of rewards, in terms of the reward guidelines, available to be paid to the informer is Rs. 74.20 lakh at 20% and is subject to the quality, specificity and accuracy of the information. In view of the foregoing and in respectful compliance with the Hon'ble Delhi High Court's aforementioned order, the Committee is of the opinion that the maximum amount of rewards, in terms of the reward guidelines, available to be paid to the informer is Rs. 74.20 lakh at 20% and is subject to the quality, specificity and accuracy of the information. The Committee is of the opinion that the ends of justice will be met if the informer is sanctioned an additional amount of Rs. 3.75 lakh making the total amount of reward payable to the informer Rs. 50 lakh as full and final settlement of his claim. This would be just, fair and commensurate with the specificity, accuracy and quality of the information provided by the informer and is comparable with the normal range of reward amounts sanctioned in other such cases.” 6. It is true that the reward does not confer any vested right upon the informer as held by this Court in Union of India vs. C. Krishna Reddy (2003) 12 SCC 627 and Union of India vs. R. Padmanabhan (2003) 7 SCC 270 but having regard to the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, particularly the facts that the information was given by the appellant about 26 years back and for the last 10 years, he has been litigating for the appropriate reward under the policy, we are satisfied that the matter should now be given quietus. In our view, interest of justice would be met if the appellant is awarded a sum of Rs. 60 lacs in full and final settlement of his claim. It may be mentioned that the 7th Reward Committee having regard to the quality, specificity and accuracy of the information provided by the appellant has awarded Rs. 50 lacs to the appellant. In order to do complete justice between the parties, we increase the reward amount from Rs. 50 lacs to Rs. 60 lacs. 7. Since Rs. 50 lacs have already been paid by the respondent No. 2 to the appellant, Mr. Paras Kuhad, learned Additional Solicitor General submits 5 that the balance sum of Rs. 10 lacs shall be paid to the appellant within two months from today. We accept the statement of learned Additional Solicitor General. 8. Appeal is disposed of as above with no order as to costs. Paras Kuhad, learned Additional Solicitor General submits 5 that the balance sum of Rs. 10 lacs shall be paid to the appellant within two months from today. We accept the statement of learned Additional Solicitor General. 8. Appeal is disposed of as above with no order as to costs. Needless to say that this order is confined to the peculiar facts and circumstances of the present case and shall not be treated as a precedent for other cases.