ORDER The petitioner retired as In-charge Accountant on 31.01.2002. He has filed this writ application in 2007 praying there for retrial dues. So far Nagar Parishad is concerned; it does not have provision for pension. The employees are entitled to gratuity and CPF contribution alone. This writ petition having been pending since 2007 and at last on courts persuasion a counter affidavit has been filed today. In the counter affidavit it is stated that the statements made in the writ petition are matters of record. Thus there is no denial that the petitioner is entitled to refund of his CP.F. Accumulation and gratuity. What has further been stated is that upon petitioner superannuation in the year 2002 till date he has not handed over charge. It is stated that auditor has found that he is accountable for certain money. In my view, there are two issues apart even from the counter affidavit it is clear that no proceeding whatsoever was ever initiated against the petitioner when the petitioner was in service. Even after his superannuation nothing has been done except as at an interval of two to three years a notice is issued to him which was never followed up with any action. Thus so far liability towards Nagar Parishad is concerned, and so far liability of Nagar Parishad to the petitioner is concerned, they are statutory liability. 2. Learned counsel for the Nagar Parishad has fairly conceded that so far gratuity is concerned there is no rule nor does any low authorize the Nagar Parishad to hold back the gratuity. In my view, it is settled law that except by authority of law no person can be deprived of his property (see Article 300 A of the Constitution). In absence of any legal authority Nagar Parishad cannot hold back the gratuity and it has to be paid. So far the CPF contribution is concerned, this is the deduction made from the employees salary and Nagar Parishad cannot withheld unless there is a law authorizing the Nagar Parishad to hold it back. In neither of the case any law or rules or regulation or circular having force which authorizes the Nagar Parishad to hold back payment of gratuity and CPF. 3. In neither of the case any law or rules or regulation or circular having force which authorizes the Nagar Parishad to hold back payment of gratuity and CPF. 3. In that view of the matter, what ever Nagar Parishad mad do the force the petitioner to render accounts it certainly cannot hold payment of gratuity or refund CPF accumulation to the petitioners’. There being no dispute that both of them are payable to the petitioner. I direct the Executive Officer, respondent no.4 to ensure that fully amount of gratuity and CPF along with up-to-date interest is paid to the petitioner within six weeks from the date of production of a copy of this order before him and failure to comply within the time specified would entitle initiation of contempt proceeding. 4. With this observation and direction the writ petition stands disposed.