Judgment :- 1. In view of the narrow prayer made in the Writ Petition, the Writ Petition is taken up for final hearing. 2. Heard both sides. 3. The petitioner is a retired Block Development Officer. He retired from service on 30.6.2009. The Accountant General authorised for payment of terminal benefits on 7.1.2010. Based on the said authorisation, terminal benefits were settled to the petitioner except the DCRG. The DCRG is withheld by the 2nd respondent on the ground that certain audit objections are there. All the audit objections were cleared except one as admitted by the learned Special Government Pleader. 4. In fact, the 1st respondent issued the proceedings in Na.Ka.No.96114/2011/C2 dated 10.1.2012 directing the 2nd respondent to disburse the DCRG to the petitioner in view of G.O.No.187 Rural Development Department dated 7.9.1999. Earlier G.O.Ms.No.247, Rural Development Department dated 20.4.1989 was issued directing the authorities to retain 25% of the DCRG and to release 75%, if there is any audit objection. The same was modified and G.O.Ms.No.187 was issued to disburse the entire DCRG and not to withhold DCRG based on audit objections. 5. It is stated that no departmental or judicial proceeding is pending against the petitioner. If the department is of the view that any departmental proceedings could be taken based on the audit objection, they had at liberty to take against the petitioner under Rule 9 of the Tamil Nadu Pension Rules. But, they have not done so. 6. In these circumstances, the petitioner has made representations to the 2nd respondent dated 1.6.2012, 19.10.2012 and 16.4.2013 to disburse his DCRG of Rs.3,51,680/-. Thereafter, now he has filed this Writ Petition seeking a direction to the respondents to release the DCRG amount of Rs.3,51,680/- along with interest at 12% from 1.7.2009. 7. At the time of hearing, the learned Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner will be satisfied if a direction is issued to the 2nd respondent to pay him the DCRG amount and he is not interested in interest. He has also submitted that the 1st respondent has directed in his letter dated 10.1.2012 to disburse the DCRG. The 2nd respondent wanted him to execute the indemnity bond and accordingly he also executed the indemnity bond. 8. In the circumstances, the Writ Petition is disposed of, directing the 2nd respondent to release the DCRG amount of Rs.3,51,680/- to the petitioner forthwith. No costs.