Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2014 DIGILAW 464 (RAJ)

Yogesh Chandra Swami v. State (Law Department)

2014-02-12

AJAY RASTOGI, J.K.RANKA

body2014
JUDGMENT 1. It is a case of judicial officer who stood retired on attaining age of superannuation with effect from 31.3.2010. 2. His only grievance is that the delay could not be attributed on his part but the fact is that the retiral benefit were released to him only on 25.11.2011 (Ann.7) and the delay in release of retiral benefits made him entitled for interest as per R.89 of Rajasthan Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1996 (Rules, 1996). 3. After notices of the present petition came to be served, reply has been filed on behalf of respondent-3, however, despite other respondents being served, no reply has been filed on their behalf, but from the reply of respondent-3 it reveals that his pension papers were forwarded to the law department on 16.9.2010 and from where the matter was further processed for release of retiral benefits and finally the PPO was issued to the petitioner on 25.11.2011 which is much after 60 days from the date when its payment became due. Rule 89 relevant for the present purpose reads ad infra- "89. Interest on delayed payment of retiral benefits 1:- If the payment of retiral benefits has been authorised after 60 days from the date when its payment became due, and it is established that the delay in payment was not on account of failure on the part of the Government servant in compliance of the procedure laid down in this chapter or elsewhere in these rules interest @ 9% per annum from the date retiral benefits became due would be payable till the end of the month preceding the month in which the retiral benefits are authorized". 4. Indisputably, it is not the case of respondents where delay if any could be attributed to the petitioner and in these facts & circumstances, in our considered view, the petitioner is certainly entitled for interest for delay in payment of retiral dues in terms of R.89 of Rules 1996. 5. Consequently, the writ petition succeeds and is allowed. The respondents are directed to make the payment of interest @ 9% per annum for delay in payment of retiral dues in terms of R.89 of Rules 1996. The order shall be complied within three months. No cost.Petition Allowed. *******