JUDGMENT : This writ petition is filed seeking the following reliefs: (i) To issue a writ of certiorari or any other writ, order or direction quashing Ext.P6 and other instructions if any for issuing Exhibit P6 from the Government. (ii) To issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ, order, or direction directing the respondents to pay the petitioner an amount of Rs.3,78,197/- from the respondents and further interest at the rate of 6.5% to the above amount from the date of this Writ Petition till the payment of the same to the petitioner. 2. It is contended that the petitioner retired from service while working as Head of Department in a private college. His date of superannuation was 30.06.1997. He retired after 33 years of service in the private college. It is submitted that Ext.P1 order dated 25.11.1998 authorizing revision of pension and other retirement benefits was made applicable to teachers of private colleges affiliated to Universities in Kerala. Clause 18 of Ext.P1 specifically reads as follows: "PAYMENT OF ARREARS 18. The arrears on account of revision of pension/family pension shall be disbursed in two installments - first in December, 1998 and second in March, 1999. Arrears of Commutation and DCRG of those who retired between 01.03.1997 and the date of this order shall be disbursed to them in 8 half yearly instalments over a period of four years from 01.12.1998. Interest as applicable for General Provident Fund will be paid on these arrears along with each instalment. The interest will accrue from the date of authorisation of revised DCRG and Commutation". However, arrears of revised pensionary benefits were released to the petitioner only on 25.09.2002 and 08.10.2002. By Ext.P3 judgment dated 26.03.2008, this Court held that in view of clause 18 to Ext.P1, the petitioner would be entitled to interest as provided in the said clause. The petitioner submits that Ext.P6 order has been passed by the Director of Collegiate Education stating that an amount of Rs.850/- and Rs.2062/- only would be payable to the petitioner as interest. The petitioner challenges the said order. 3. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the 2nd respondent contending that interest has been paid from the date of authorisation of revised pension and commutation of pension by the Accountant General till the date of payments. The petitioner challenges the said order. 3. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the 2nd respondent contending that interest has been paid from the date of authorisation of revised pension and commutation of pension by the Accountant General till the date of payments. It is submitted that authorisation was made on 09.09.2002 only and therefore the petitioner would be entitled to interest for arrears of gratuity and commutation of pension from 09.09.2002 to 25.09.2002 and for arrears of revised pension from 09.09.2002 to 08.10.2002. 4. A separate counter affidavit has been filed by the Accountant General wherein it has been specifically stated that the proposal for sanction of revised pensionary benefits had been forwarded by the Director of Collegiate Education to the Accountant General and was received in his office only on 21.05.2002. It is stated that after scrutiny and verification of the same, revised pensionary benefits were authorized on 09.09.2002. It is therefore stated that by the time pension papers had been forwarded to the Accountant General. The last instalment in the eight half yearly instalments ordered as per Ext.P1 was also due to expire on 01.06.2002. It is stated that no delay had occurred on the part of the Accountant General in authorising the payment of revised pensionary benefits after scrutiny and verification since papers had been received only on 21.05.2002. 5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Senior Government Pleader appearing for respondents. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that arrears of pension should have been paid immediately after the implementation of Ext.P1 order to the petitioner who was already a pensioner at that time. It is stated that the first instalment would be due on 01.12.1998. The last sentence in clause 18 where it is stated that interest will accrue from the date of authorisation of revised DCRG and commutation would clearly indicate a case where calculation and sanction of revised pensionary benefits are done in time by the concerned respondents. Though it is stated in the counter affidavit of the 3rd respondent that the pension papers were forwarded by the 2nd respondent only on 21.05.2002, no reason whatsoever is stated in any of the communications of the 2nd respondent or even in the counter affidavit filed in the instant case, for the delay in forwarding pension papers for authorisation to the Accountant General. No contention is also raised that the petitioner was in any way at fault for the delay in sanctioning and authorisation of revised benefits to the petitioner. 7. In the above view of the matter, I am of the opinion that the last sentence contained in clause 18 to the effect that interest will accrue from the date of authorisation cannot be relied upon by the 2nd respondent to contend that even in case of inordinate delay which occurred in sanctioning of pension by the 2nd respondent, petitioner would be entitled to interest only from the date of authorisation of the revised pensionary benefits by the Accountant General. The said clause is clearly intended to apply only in a case where pension papers are forwarded within a reasonable time by the 2nd respondent or where there are compelling and clear reasons for the delay. Pension and arrears thereon being the property of the pensioners, I am of the opinion that where interest at statutory rate is specifically provided in Ext.P1 for arrears of pensionary benefits, the 2nd respondent cannot contend that undue delay which occurred in sanctioning of revised pension and forwarding of pension papers can be taken as an excuse to deny payment of interest to the petitioner in terms of Ext.P1. 8. In the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the considered opinion that six months from the date when the first instalment became due under Ext.P1 can be taken as reasonable time for the sanctioning and authorisation of revised DCRG and commutation. It shall therefore be deemed that the date of authorisation of the revised DCRG and commutation was after six months from the date of the entitlement of the petitioner for the first instalment of the arrears due to him on 01.12.1998, i.e. with effect from 01.05.1999. In the above view of the matter, petitioner will be entitled to interest on the revised pensionary benefits disbursed to him on 25.09.2002 and 08.10.2002 from 01.05.1999 at the rates applicable for General Provident Fund as on the relevant date. The 1st and 2nd respondents shall compute the interest payable to petitioner on the above basis and disburse the same to him deducting any amounts already paid on the strength of Ext.P6 order within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The writ petition is ordered accordingly.