ORDER : Seeking a direction for release of earnest money deposit for the licence issued to the petitioner for sale of foreign liquor for the period between 01.04.2011 to 31.03.2012, the present writ petition has been filed. 2. Mr. Sachin Kumar, the learned counsel for the petitioner refers to Clause 13 (ka) of the Sale Notification dated 12.02.2011 and submits that a licensee is required to deposit 1/12th of the license amount which was to be adjusted in the last two months of the financial year. The balance amount would be paid to the licensee after 30th June, 2012 after the adjustment. It is submitted that under the licence, a licensee is liable to pay interest at the rate of 5% in case of default in making payment of the licence fee, which shall be paid on or before 20th of each month. It is submitted that the security deposit of the petitioner was not paid even for three years and only after the present writ petition was filed, the respondents took steps in the matter and therefore, suitable interest may be awarded to the petitioner on the amount of security deposit. 3. Mr. Lukesh Kumar, the learned counsel for the respondent-State of Jharkhand submits that the security deposit of the petitioner has been paid to him by demand draft. In the supplementary counter-affidavit dated 29.07.2015 the respondents have taken a stand that after respondent no.2 ordered refund of security deposit to the petitioner, the bill was prepared and handed over to him for encashment. The respondents have averred as under :- 6. “That it was stated in the earlier counter affidavit filed by the respondents that the amount of security of the petitioner was deposited under head “0039” by answering respondent no.3. Pursuant to the order dated 24.09.2012 of return by respondent no. 2, bill dated 11.10.2012 was prepared. However, the same was objected to by the Treasury Officer, vide objection dated 19.10.2012. …......................................................................... 12. That it is further humbly stated that subsequently, the aforesaid electronic/technical/administrative difficulty was sorted out and finally the security amount for an amount of Rs. 1,73,645/has been paid to the petitioner vide demand draft no. 713785 dated 28.05.2015 and the receiving to the same has been given by the petitioner”. 5. …......................................................................... 12. That it is further humbly stated that subsequently, the aforesaid electronic/technical/administrative difficulty was sorted out and finally the security amount for an amount of Rs. 1,73,645/has been paid to the petitioner vide demand draft no. 713785 dated 28.05.2015 and the receiving to the same has been given by the petitioner”. 5. Considering the stand taken by respondents in the supplementary counter-affidavit, I am of the opinion that whether the delay caused in making payment to the petitioner is on account of willful negligence on the part of the respondents or not, would involve an adjudication on facts. Accordingly, I am not inclined to award interest to the petitioner on the amount of security deposit in the present proceeding. However, a liberty is reserved with the petitioner to approach Civil Court for compensation including award interest on security deposit. The writ petition stands disposed of.