Judgment 1. Mr.R.Anandaraj, learned Government Advocate takes notice for the first respondent and Mr.K.Santhyasing, learned Standing Counsel takes notice for the respondents 2 to 7. 2. The petitioner seeks for a Mandamus directing the Respondents 1 to 3 to disburse the difference of gratuity amount to the tune of Rs.1,68,528/- as per the order of the third Respondent dated 07.10.2011 with interest of 9% per annum. 3. The case of the petitioner is that he had worked as Senior Assistant in the respondent Corporation and attained the age of superannuation on 31.10.2010. It is the further case that at the time his retirement he was paid only leaser gratuity amount, due to the late fixation of basic pay and thereafter, the Government of Tamil Nadu fixed the revision of pay on par with other departments with effect from 01.01.2008. Consequently, the third respondent through proceedings dated 07.10.2011, issued an order sanctioning for payment of difference of gratuity to the petitioner and 18 others persons, who retired from service. Accordingly, the petitioner is entitled to Rs.1,68,528/-, which has not been paid so far, in spite of several representations made by the petitioner. Therefore, the present writ petition is filed before this Court. 4. The learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioner submitted that in respect of similarly situated persons, this Court passed several orders and out of which, one such order was made in W.P(MD)No.5466 of 2014 dated 02.04.2014, wherein the respondents therein were directed to disburse the difference of gratuity amount with admissible rate of interest, within a period of three months. 5. Mr.K.Sathyasing, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents 2 to 7 fair enough to submit that the issue involved in this case is also squarely covered by the earlier order passed by this Court and however, the rate of interest as sought for by the petitioner cannot be ordered. 6. 5. Mr.K.Sathyasing, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents 2 to 7 fair enough to submit that the issue involved in this case is also squarely covered by the earlier order passed by this Court and however, the rate of interest as sought for by the petitioner cannot be ordered. 6. Considering the fact that it is not in dispute that the third respondent has already fixed the quantum of difference in gratuity payable to the petitioner as Rs.1,68,528/- as early as on 17.10.2011 and considering the fact that the said amount has not been disbursed to the petitioner so far, and also considering the fact that this Court has allowed the writ petition filed by similarly situated persons and granted the relief, this Writ Petition is allowed and the respondents 1 to 3 are directed to disburse the difference of gratuity amount of Rs.1,68,528/- to the petitioner with admissible rate of interest as per the Provisions of Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 and disburse the same to the petitioner within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs.