Order This Letters Patent Appeal is preferred against the order dated 9.12.2011 passed in W.P.(S) No. 1431 of 2009, directing the appellant-Jharkhand State Forest Development Corporation Ltd., Ranchi (JSFDC) to make payment of gratuity amounting to Rs.61,542.90 and interest at the rate of 6% per annum on the amount of Rs.73,416/- on account of delay in payment of unutilized leave encashment. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the 1strespondent retired on 31.1.2004 from the post of Forester, when he was posted at Minor Forest Produce Project, Daltonganj Division. Earlier the 1stand 2ndrespondents filed W.P.(S) No. 3845 of 2005 for payment of retiral dues and the same was disposed of on 17.8.2005 directing the appellants to pay the admitted retiral dues together with interest legally payable to the 1stand 2ndrespondents within three months from the date of receipt of the copy of the order. 3. Alleging that the order has not been complied with, the respondent filed Contempt (Civil) Case No. 7 of 2006. The said Contempt (Civil) Case No. 7 of 2006 was dropped on the ground that the order of the learned Single Judge is not specific and that the respondents have not got the same clarified by the learned Single Judge and that the same cannot be urged by way of a contempt application. 4. During the pendency of the Contempt Petition, the Jharkhand State Forest Development Corporation had made the following payments to the 1st respondent : (i) Gratuity:- Rs.50,486/- (vide cheque no. 230295 dated 4.5.2006 (ii) Group Insurance : Rs.8,994/- (vide cheque no.904401 dated 5.10.2006 (iii) G.P.F. : Rs.1,95,000/- (vide cheque no. 407570 dated 19.5.2004) & Rs.21043.00/- (vide cheque no. 157440 dated 23.6.2006); (iv) Pension amount : Pension papers forwarded. 5. The respondents filed W.P.(S) No. 1431 of 2009, seeking for a direction upon the authorities for payment of the amount payable to the respondents towards G.P.F. and gratuity. During pendency of the writ petition, vide cheque no. 406700 dated 20.4.2011, an amount of Rs.73,416/- on account of unutilized leave encashment has been paid to the 1strespondents. 6. The learned Single Judge allowed the writ petition by order dated 9.12.2011, directing the Jharkhand State Forest Development Corporation to make payment of gratuity amounting to Rs.61,542.90/- and also to pay interest at the rate of 6% per annum on the amount of Rs.73,416/- on account of delay in payment of unutilised leave encashment. 7. 6. The learned Single Judge allowed the writ petition by order dated 9.12.2011, directing the Jharkhand State Forest Development Corporation to make payment of gratuity amounting to Rs.61,542.90/- and also to pay interest at the rate of 6% per annum on the amount of Rs.73,416/- on account of delay in payment of unutilised leave encashment. 7. Being aggrieved by the order passed by the Writ Court, the appellant- Jharkhand State Forest Development Corporation has preferred this appeal. 8. We have heard Mr. Prabhash Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the appellants-corporation and Mr. Amit Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel for the private respondents. 9. The learned counsel for the appellants, Mr. Prabhash Kumar submitted that Jharkhand State Forest Development Corporation Ltd. (in short 'JSFDC') was constituted on 23.03.2002 and the 1strespondent retired on 31.1.2004 and he worked with the appellant-JSFDC only for a short period of one year and nine months and while so the 1strespondent cannot claim entire dues payable to him from the appellants. In so far as gratuity amount claimed by the 1strespondent, the learned counsel for the appellant, Mr. Prabhash Kumar submitted that earlier by Office Order No. 9 dated 27.06.1995, the 1strespondent has been inflicted punishment of recovery of Rs. 61,542.90/-, out of gratuity amount of Rs. 1,12,029/- payable to the 1strespondent, in the departmental proceeding, which was initiated vide office order no. 7A dated 5.3.1992 by the G.M., Hazaribagh. Consequently an amount of Rs. 61,543/- has been deducted by the appellants and hence the 1strespondent cannot make grievance upon the same. It was submitted that the learned Single Judge did not keep in view that the punishment of recovery of Rs. 61,542.90/- inflicted in the departmental proceeding has been recovered from the gratuity amount. It is further stated that the gratuity amount of Rs. 61,543/- has already been paid by the Jharkhand State Forest Development Corporation. In so far as the interest payable on the unutilized leave encashment, the learned counsel for the appellant submitted that interest amount has already been paid. 10. Learned counsel for the 1st respondent submitted that in so far as recovery of Rs. 61,543/- inflicted as punishment upon the 1strespondent is concerned, that has already been settled and no amount is liable to be recovered from the 1strespondent and while so the Corporation has unjustly deducted Rs. 61,543/- from the gratuity. 10. Learned counsel for the 1st respondent submitted that in so far as recovery of Rs. 61,543/- inflicted as punishment upon the 1strespondent is concerned, that has already been settled and no amount is liable to be recovered from the 1strespondent and while so the Corporation has unjustly deducted Rs. 61,543/- from the gratuity. In so far as the interest on the leave encashment in concerned, the learned counsel submitted that in view of the delay in paying the amount, the learned Single Judge rightly ordered payment of interest. 11. We have carefully considered the submission of learned counsel for the parties and perused the materials and order of the learned Single Judge. 12. Direction of the learned Single Judge is of two fold; (i) the appellant was directed to make payment of Rs. 61,542.90/- to the respondent, which was deducted from the gratuity and (ii) payment of interest @ 6 % per annum on the delay in payment amount of Rs. 73,416/- payable towards unutilized leave encashment. 13. In so far as the gratuity amount of Rs. 61,542.90/- (round figure Rs. 61,543/-), the learned counsel has first drawn our attention to Annexure-A to the 3rdSupplementary Affidavit filed by appellant-J.S.F.D.C (page 48 to the memo of appeal), which is a communication sent to the 1strespondent seeking recovery of the said amount of Rs. 61,542.90/-, which was inflicted as a punishment in the departmental proceeding (by order dated 27.06.1995), which is stated to be initiated by the General Manager., J.S.F.D.C., Hazaribagh. The learned counsel for the appellants-corporation has also not shown any provisions as to how by way of punishment recovery can be made from the gratuity, which is a statutory amount payable to the employee. Since the gratuity amount is statutorily payable to the employee, the learned Single Judge rightly directed the appellants-corporation to pay the remaining amount of gratuity of Rs. 61,543/-. According to the appellant, now the said G.P.F. amount of Rs. 61,543/- has already been paid to the 1strespondent. However, having regard to the submissions made by the appellant-corporation and in view of the Annexure-A to the 3rdSupplementary Affidavit filed by appellant-J.S.F.D.C (page 48 to the memo of appeal), the appellant-corporation is at liberty to proceed against the 1strespondent for recovery of the amount if the amount is still due to be recovered, after affording sufficient opportunity of hearing in accordance with law. 14. 14. In so far as interest @ 6 % awarded on the amount of Rs. 73,416/-, being the amount of unutilized leave encashment, it is pertinent to point out that the 1strespondent retired way back in 2004 and even according to the appellant-corporation, the said amount of Rs. 73,416/- on account of unutilized leave encashment had been paid to the 1strespondent only vide cheque no. 406700 dated 20.4.2011, nearly seven years after the retirement of the 1strespondent. Having regard to the inordinate delay in payment of unutilized leave encashment, the learned Single Judge rightly directed the appellant-corporation to pay the interest @ 6 % per annum and we do not find any reason warranting interference on this score. 15. Learned counsel for the appellants-corporation submitted that even though the 1strespondent worked for short period, entire retirement benefits have been paid by J.S.F.D.C to the 1st respondent but the said amount has to be paid by the Bihar State Forest Development Corporation. The arrangement between the two corporations is not before us. The Bihar State Forest Development Corporation in paragraph 11 at page 12 of its counter affidavit filed in the writ petition has stated as under: “10....... Hence, if any person's retirement benefits is paid by Jharkhand State Forest Development Corporation the same can be adjusted from the dues payable to Bihar. A proposal for bifurcation of Bihar State Forest Development Corporation between Bihar & Jharkhand has been sent to Government of India which will be evident from perusal of Annexure-A (The letter dated 30.06.3008)." 16. Having regard to the above averment made by the Bihar State Forest Development Corporation in its counter affidavit, it is open to the appellants-corporation to make suitable adjustment regarding amount paid to the 1strespondent as per the terms of their bifurcation. 17. The order passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P. (S) No. 1431 of 2009 is confirmed and this Letters Patent Appeal is disposed of with the following observations and directions:- (i) The appellants-Corporation is at liberty to proceed against the 1strespondent for recovery of the amount Rs. 17. The order passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P. (S) No. 1431 of 2009 is confirmed and this Letters Patent Appeal is disposed of with the following observations and directions:- (i) The appellants-Corporation is at liberty to proceed against the 1strespondent for recovery of the amount Rs. 61,543/-, which amount was said to have been inflicted as punishment upon the 1strespondent, if the amount is still due to be recovered, after affording sufficient opportunity of hearing to the 1strespondent and in accordance with law; and (ii) So far as the retiral benefits paid to the 1st respondent is concerned, the appellants-Corporation is at liberty to make suitable adjustments from the dues payable to the Bihar State Forest Development Corporation as per the terms of their bifurcation.