Judgment 1. The petitioner was not given the retirement benefits within the statutory period. The petitioner earlier filed a writ petition challenging the recovery order passed by the third respondent. While allowing the writ petition, this Court was pleased to direct the respondent to settle the terminal benefits within a period of one month. 2. It is the case of the petitioner that principal amount was settled subsequently. Since it was paid belatedly, the petitioner submitted a representation on 05.09.2013, claiming interest. 3. The respondent retained the money beyond the statutory period. Even after the disposal of the writ petition in W.P.(md).No.2932/2011, the respondent failed to pay the retirement benefits to the petitioner. The petitioner is therefore correct in his contention that he is entitled for interest. 4. The first respondent is directed to pay interest to the petitioner for the principal amount, during the delay period at the rate of 12%. Such exercise shall be completed within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, failing which, the amount would carry interest at 15%. 5. The writ petition is disposed of with the above direction. No costs.