JUDGMENT : 1. With the consent of the parties, hearing of this matter has been done through video conferencing. They have no complaint about any audio and visual connectivity. 2. The instant intra-court appeal under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent of the Patna High Court, is against the order/judgment dated 09.08.2018 passed by learned Single Judge of this Court in W.P.(S) No.5477 of 2017, whereby and whereunder the part of the relief pertaining to claim for interest on delayed payment of pension and other post retiral benefits, have been denied to be extended in favour of the writ petitioner-appellant, since according to the learned Single Judge, he has failed to establish that for no fault on his part he was not paid leave encashment and group insurance amount with the prescribed time. 3. The brief facts of the case, which requires to be referred herein, read hereunder as: The appellant-writ petitioner was appointed as Assistant Engineer in the Public Works Department (PWD) of Bridge Design Division-III, Punaichak, Patna, Bihar, accordingly, he joined on 18.12.1980. He was discharging his duty to one place or the other on being transferred to different places. He was granted promotion as Executive Engineer sometime in the year 1999 and was posted at Zila Parishad, Muzaffarpur. After bifurcation of the unified State of Bihar, his services was placed to the successor State of Jharkhand and was posted at different places and finally as Executive Officer, Nagar Parishad, Chatra, from where he retired on attaining the age of superannuation with effect from 31.01.2012. The writ petitioner became entitled to his leave encashment on the earned leave outstanding, group insurance and the difference of amount of money from January 2012 arising from the encashment of 7% with effect from January, 2012. The previous dearness allowance of 58% was enhanced to 65% i.e. increase of 7% in dearness allowance with effect from January, 2012. The writ petitioner became entitled to his leave encashment on the earned leave outstanding, group insurance and the difference of amount of money from January 2012 arising from the encashment of 7% with effect from January, 2012. The previous dearness allowance of 58% was enhanced to 65% i.e. increase of 7% in dearness allowance with effect from January, 2012. The case of the writ petitioner, as has been made out by him before the writ Court that in spite of issuance of authority slip by the Accountant General (A & E) on 11.06.2014 for Rs.9,39,510/-, the writ petitioner was not paid single penny, being aggrieved with the inaction on the part of the State authority he made series of representations before the competent authority with a prayer for disbursement of leave encashment amount on the earned leave 300 days outstanding along with penal interest for delayed payment. The grievance of the writ petitioner when was not redressed, he approached to this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of direction for release of amount pertaining to group insurance, leave encashment and to sanction difference of dearness allowance. The learned Single Judge, after appreciating the stand of the State of Jharkhand as also the Accountant General (A & E), Jharkhand, disposed of the writ petition, denying the claim for interest on delayed payment and other post retiral benefits since the writ petitioner had failed to establish that for no fault on his part, he was not paid leave encashment and group insurance within the prescribed time, with liberty to the petitioner to approach the competent authority for payment of difference on account of enhanced dearness allowance. 4. 4. The present intra-court appeal has been filed against the order of the learned Single Judge, to the effect holding therein that the appellant is not entitled to payment of interest from the date of his retirement, as the appellant has not pleaded in the writ petition about the submission of pension papers by him six months prior to his retirement, the same is the subject matter of the present intra court appeal, inter-alia on the ground that the learned Single Judge has failed to appreciate the legal position that the writ petitioner was not required under the law to submit any paper or document or any particulars prior to his retirement for payment of group insurance, leave encashment amount and the difference due to enhancing dearness allowance amount. The order passed by the learned Single Judge has also been assailed on the ground that the requirement to submit the document six months prior to the date of retirement, is for grant of pension and since the writ petition has not been filed for grant of pension, rather direction was sought for with respect to disbursement of amount of group insurance, leave encashment amount and the difference due to enhanced dearness allowance, therefore, the reasoning which has been assigned by the learned Single Judge for not releasing the interest on delayed payment of group insurance amount, leave encashment amount and the difference due to enhanced dearness allowance, is not proper. It has further been assailed, on the ground that admittedly the writ petitioner has retired from service with effect from 31.01.2012 and as such, he became entitled to get the amount of group insurance as also the leave encashment and the difference due to enhanced dearness allowance till its realisation, which fact has even been admitted by the respondents in the counter affidavit showing therein the delay in issuance of departmental sanction order which admittedly was issued on 20.05.2014, by which the Treasury Office, Deoghar was authorized to provide the benefit of leave encashment vide letter dated 11.06.2014 and again issued the amended sanction order in favour of the Treasury Office, Chatra in terms of new sanction letter dated 02.03.2016, for which the respondent State of Jharkhand issued letter on 07.04.2016 and reminders on 16.09.2016 and 19.09.2017 to return back earlier issued sanctioned letter dated 11.06.2014 along with non-payment certificate, which was not received in the office of the concerned respondent till date for issuance of new leave encashment sanctioned in view of the letter dated 02.03.2016. Further, in the supplementary counter affidavit, the stand has been taken pertaining to release of difference amount in lieu of enhancement of 7% in dearness allowance since the appellant was retired on 31.01.2012, thereafter the difference pay was to be made by pre audit of the said bill of the Accountant General and for that the bill had been sought from the last posting of the appellant i.e. Nagar Parishad, Chatra vide departmental letter no.1461 dated 02.03.2016, letter no.4816 dated 03.08.2016 and letter no.5723 dated 13.10.2017 and as such, these letters merely shows that the correspondences were made but no actual benefit against the group insurance, leave encashment amount and the difference in dearness allowance was paid and in view thereof, the writ petitioner is entitled for interest upon delayed payment of the amount under these headings, which has not been appreciated by the learned Single Judge and hence the instant appeal. 5. This Court has noticed that after hearing the learned senior counsel for the appellant by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 13.11.2019, the State was directed to apprise this Court, as to whether the amount pertaining to the leave encashment and group insurance have been paid or not? 5. This Court has noticed that after hearing the learned senior counsel for the appellant by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 13.11.2019, the State was directed to apprise this Court, as to whether the amount pertaining to the leave encashment and group insurance have been paid or not? The State had apprised to this Court, as would appear from the order dated 19.12.2019 that due to certain technicalities payment of leave encashment and group insurance could not be paid, but an undertaking was given that the payment would be made in terms of the direction contained in the order dated 13.11.2019 within a period of one week, on such undertaking the officers who were called upon, whose personal appearance was dispensed with by adjourning the matter to be heard on 09.01.2020, failing which, they would be required to appear in person. It further appears from the order dated 23.01.2020 passed in this appeal that the matter was adjourned on behest of the prayer made on behalf of the State of Jharkhand to list the case on 06.02.2020 for further hearing, on the point as to why the interest should not be imposed upon the unpaid amount of the leave encashment, group insurance and difference of dearness allowance which have now been paid on 06.01.2020, on the ground that the writ petitioner has retired on attaining the age of superannuation on 31.01.2012 itself. It further appears from the order dated 06.02.2020 that an affidavit has been filed by the Road Construction Department, stating inter alia therein that the delay has been caused in payment of amount mentioned in the order dated 23.01.2020 passed in the present appeal and as such, the stand inter alia has been taken by the State of Jharkhand that the interest should be a joint liability of the Road Construction Department, Accountant General as well as the Nagar Parishad, Chatra. This Court considering the fact that the Nagar Parishad, Chatra was not party to the proceeding, therefore, deem it fit and proper to accord liberty to the appellant to implead Nagar Parishad, Chatra through its Chief Executive Officer and the Chief Executive Officer, Chatra Nagar Parishad, to be impleaded as respondent no.5 and 6 to this appeal. This Court considering the fact that the Nagar Parishad, Chatra was not party to the proceeding, therefore, deem it fit and proper to accord liberty to the appellant to implead Nagar Parishad, Chatra through its Chief Executive Officer and the Chief Executive Officer, Chatra Nagar Parishad, to be impleaded as respondent no.5 and 6 to this appeal. In pursuance to the said direction, Nagar Parishad, Chatra through its Chief Executive Officer and the Chief Executive Officer, Chatra Nagar Parishad have been impleaded as respondent nos.5 and 6. The affidavit has been filed by the Nagar Parishad, Chatra. 6. This Court, therefore, deem it fit and proper now to proceed to scrutinize the fault lies whether on the part of the writ petitioner or on the part of the Road Construction Department of the State of Jharkhand or on the part of the Accountant General (A & E) or the Nagar Parishad, Chatra, as because it is settled position of law that the interest upon the delayed payment is to be made, even though there is no statutory provision, but if the delay has been caused on the part of the authority who are competent to disburse the amount or in the chain of disbursement of money, and if the Court will find that the delay lies on the part of either of the authority, who have been assigned with the accountability to process the matter, so that employee who is legally entitled to get the amount must get it without any delay, and if there is any delay on their part, certainly the employee will be entitled to get the interest casting liability upon the erring department/officials, but simultaneously, it is settled that if delay lies on the part of the employee, certainly no interest would be directed to be paid in favour of the concerned retired employee. The State of Jharkhand has filed a counter affidavit on 04.02.2020 duly been sworn by one Sri Ganesh Kumar, holding the post of Under Secretary, Road Construction Department under the authority of the other respondents to swear the counter affidavit. The State of Jharkhand has filed a counter affidavit on 04.02.2020 duly been sworn by one Sri Ganesh Kumar, holding the post of Under Secretary, Road Construction Department under the authority of the other respondents to swear the counter affidavit. The affidavit has been filed in terms of order dated 23.01.2020 passed by this Court, where from it is evident that the statement has been made to the effect that the appellant-writ petitioner was appointed as Assistant Engineer on 18.12.1980 in Public Works Department (PWD) Bihar, Patna and being posted from one place to another finally when his service was allocated to the State of Jharkhand on coming into effect of State Reorganization Act, 2000, he was posted as Executive Engineer in the Nagar Parishad, Chatra, from where he was superannuated on 31.01.2012. It has been stated therein that the Road Construction Department is the Nodal Department, only responsible for sanction of pension, gratuity and leave encashment but leave encashment has to be paid from where the employee retires, in the present case Nagar Parishad, Chatra. Rest of the retiral benefits, such as, Government Provident Fund, Group Insurance and Difference of Dearness Allowance has to be sanctioned and paid by the Nagar Parishad, Chatra. It further appears from para 7 of the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the State that the writ petitioner had submitted his pension paper on 27.04.2012 and vide letter no.5417 dated 24.07.2012, 90% pension & gratuity was sanctioned, in pursuance thereto, the Accountant General, Jharkhand vide letter no.5321 dated 09.11.2012 had issued authority for pension. On the point of delayed payment of leave encashment, the stand inter alia has been taken as would appear from paragraph 8 of the counter affidavit filed by the State of Jharkhand to the effect that the Accountant General, Jharkhand (respondent no.4), vide letter no.1433 dated 10.02.2014 gave the account of leave encashment (number of days). On the point of delayed payment of leave encashment, the stand inter alia has been taken as would appear from paragraph 8 of the counter affidavit filed by the State of Jharkhand to the effect that the Accountant General, Jharkhand (respondent no.4), vide letter no.1433 dated 10.02.2014 gave the account of leave encashment (number of days). The Road Construction Department vide letter no.3864 dated 20.05.2014 sanctioned the leave encashment and the said letter was sent to the Treasury Office, Deoghar as would appear from Annexure-A appended to the counter affidavit, which according to the State of Jharkhand, was due to inadvertence since the sanction of the leave encashment which was sent to the Treasury Office, Deoghar instead of Treasury Office, Chatra and as such, vide letter no.1460 dated 02.03.2016 the earlier sanction order contained in letter no.3864 dated 20.05.2014 was amended and the Accountant General, Jharkhand and the Treasury Office, Chatra was informed about the same. The Accountant General, Jharkhand vide letter no.1241 dated 03.12.2018 had issued the authority for payment of leave encashment of Rs.9,39,510/- and the said amount was paid by the Nagar Parishad, Chatra on 21.12.2019. The statement has been made at paragraph 9 pertaining to delayed payment of group insurance, wherein it has been stated to the effect that the sanction for group insurance was to be made by the Nagar Parishad, Chatra but since the Nagar Parishad, Chatra was delaying in sanctioning of group insurance and the writ petitioner had requested the Road Construction Department, therefore, the Road Construction Department vide letter no.1462 dated 02.03.2016 sanctioned the amount of Rs.1,84,782/- for group insurance but the payment could not have been made by the Road Construction Department due to technical reason since until and unless the Drawing and Disbursing Officer Code (DDO Code) was not removed by the Nagar Parishad, Chatra, the same could not be accepted by the Road Construction Department. The Nagar Parishad, Chatra removed the DDO Code on 24.12.2019 and the said DDO Code was accepted by the Road Construction Department and Rs.1,84,782/- was paid to the writ petitioner on 02.01.2020 vide Bill no.260/2019-20. It further appears from paragraph 10 which pertains to delayed payment of difference of dearness allowance to the effect, it has been stated that the said payment was wholly the responsibility of the Nagar Parishad, Chatra. It further appears from paragraph 10 which pertains to delayed payment of difference of dearness allowance to the effect, it has been stated that the said payment was wholly the responsibility of the Nagar Parishad, Chatra. The difference of dearness allowance of Rs.3,986/- was paid to the appellant vide Cheque no.743843 dated 24.12.2019 by the Nagar Parishad, Chatra. The Nagar Parishad has filed a separate affidavit in the capacity of respondent nos.5 and 6, inter alia, therein it has been stated that as per circular Nagar Vikas Department, Jharkhand, Ranchi was to make payment of salary including grade pay, dearness allowance, house allowance and medical allowance to the writ petitioner. It has been stated therein that since parent department of the writ petitioner was Road Construction, so entire retiral benefit ought to have been paid by parental department, the Road Construction or at the instance of the Road Construction Department. It has been stated further that the scheme of group insurance was/is not available in the Department of Nagar Parishad and the writ petitioner had never filed any petition in the Chatra Nagar Parishad to remove DDO Code nor the parental department of the writ petitioner prior to 19.11.2019 directed/requested the Nagar Parishad, Chatra to remove DDO Code and immediately on 19.11.2019 when a letter was received from the Deputy Secretary, Road Construction Department for removal of DDO Code of the writ petitioner, the same was removed on 24.12.2019. It has further been stated that in pursuance to letter no.3864(s) dated 20.05.2014 issued under the signature of the Deputy Secretary, Road Construction Department, vide its Memo no.GW-4-PWD-S-II-18-1242 dated 03.12.2018 a authority for disbursement for amount of Rs.9,39,510/- was granted and communicated to the Nagar Parishad, Chatra by the Accountant General and accordingly, on 23.12.2019 vide Bill no.1/2019-20 the amount of Rs.9,39,510/- was paid in favour of the writ petitioner. Further, the difference of dearness allowance to the tune of Rs.3,986/- was paid on 24.12.2019 from the fund of Nagar Parishad though the fund in this respect was not made available to the Nagar Parishad, Chatra as yet, which was paid in terms of the letter received by Nagar Parishad issued by the Road Construction Department vide letter No.5578(S) W.E dated 19.11.2019. Therefore, on the basis of the aforesaid stand, it has been submitted that there is no laches on the part of the Nagar Parishad, Chatra, rather it is the parent department of the writ petitioner i.e. the Road Construction Department which has caused delay in disbursement of the amount of leave encashment, group insurance and the difference of the dearness allowance. We have also perused the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the Accountant General (A & E), Jharkhand, Ranchi wherein inter alia, the stand has been taken that the office of the Accountant General has acted immediately in terms of the letter dated 20.05.2014 issued by the Deputy Secretary, Road Construction Department, Government of Jharkhand by which the authority letter for leave encashment for 300 days had been received which was to be made through the Treasury Officer, Deoghar, but the revised authority letter was received in the office of the Accountant General on 02.03.2016, requesting therein that due to inadvertence the authority slip which was issued on 20.05.2014 addressed to the Treasury Officer, Deoghar instead of Treasury Officer, Chatra and as such, the office of the Accountant General immediately on receipt of the revised authority letter dated 02.03.2016 requested the office of the Treasury Officer, Deoghar to send non-payment certificate by making a communication dated 07.04.2016 with a copy of the same sent to the Deputy Secretary, Road Construction Department, Government of Jharkhand as also the writ petitioner but the Treasury Officer, Deoghar did not respond to the letter dated 07.04.2016 issued by the office of the Accountant General (A & E), Jharkhand and as such, a reminder was issued on 16.09.2016 with a copy of the same to the Deputy Secretary, Road Construction Department, Government of Jharkhand and the writ petitioner. Further, when no response was furnished by the office of the Treasury Officer, Deoghar, another reminder was issued on 19.09.2017 with a copy of the same sent to the Deputy Secretary, Road Construction Department and the writ petitioner. Further, when no response was furnished by the office of the Treasury Officer, Deoghar, another reminder was issued on 19.09.2017 with a copy of the same sent to the Deputy Secretary, Road Construction Department and the writ petitioner. Again correspondence was made with the Deputy Commissioner, Deoghar vide letter dated 05.10.2017 requested him to take necessary action in the matter and a copy of the same was also sent to the Treasury Officer, Deoghar, but even the Deputy Commissioner, Deoghar did not take any initiative, again correspondence was made with the Deputy Commissioner, Deoghar by the office of the Accountant General on 11.10.2018, requesting again therein to take necessary action in the matter and a copy of the same was sent to the Treasury Officer, Deoghar. It is only after much correspondences having been made in this regard by the office of the Accountant General, the Treasury Officer, Deoghar sent non-payment certificate vide letter dated 26.10.2018 and authority letter in original to the office of the Accountant General and immediately on receipt of the same, the office of the Accountant General issued revised authority letter to the Treasury Office, Chatra on 04.12.2018 with a copy of the same sent to the Deputy Secretary, Road Construction Department and the writ petitioner. It has further been stated that the office of the Accountant General received a communication from the Executive Officer, Nagar Parishad, Chatra dated 05.12.2019 enquiring from the office of the Accountant General that as authority letter was issued on 03.12.2018 itself, so whether payment will be done on the same authority letter or fresh authority letter is required and if so, it may be issued at the earliest. In response to the said letter, office of the Accountant General wrote a letter on 19.12.2019 communicating the Executive Officer, Nagar Parishad, Chatra that if payment till date is not done on the said authority letter dated 04.12.2018, the payment may be done on the same authority letter and no fresh authority letter is required. 7. It is evident from the stand inter alia agitated by the respondents in the affidavit of the State of Jharkhand, Nagar Parishad, Chatra and the Accountant General (A & E), Jharkahand, Ranchi that admittedly the writ petitioner has superannuated from service on 31.01.2012 while working as Executive Officer, Nagar Parishad, Chatra. 7. It is evident from the stand inter alia agitated by the respondents in the affidavit of the State of Jharkhand, Nagar Parishad, Chatra and the Accountant General (A & E), Jharkahand, Ranchi that admittedly the writ petitioner has superannuated from service on 31.01.2012 while working as Executive Officer, Nagar Parishad, Chatra. It is available on record that the issue of non-payment of leave encashment, group insurance and difference of dearness allowance was the issue before the writ Court. It is admitted from the stand of the State of Jharkhand, as has been stated in the counter affidavit that the writ petitioner had submitted his pension paper on 27.04.2012, in pursuance thereto, the pension and gratuity have already been paid. It further appears from the affidavit filed on behalf of the State of Jharkhand that the office of the Accountant General had furnished the account of leave encashment vide letter dated 10.02.2014 but no such letter has been referred as to when the Road Construction Department, who is the parent department of the writ petitioner, had issued communication to the office of the Accountant General requiring therein the detail of account of leave encashment (number of days), however, the Road Construction Department had sanctioned the leave encashment vide letter no.3864 dated 20.05.2014 but the said letter instead of sending it to the Treasury Office, Chatra, was sent to the Treasury Office, Deoghar, so far as it relates to disbursement of the amount of leave encashment. It further appears that the Road Construction Department amended the earlier sanction order which was contained in letter no.3864 dated 20.05.2014, which was wrongly been sent to the Treasury Office, Deoghar instead of Treasury Office, Chatra only on 02.03.2016 vide letter no.1460, meaning thereby, the State of Jharkhand in serious negligence and by taking lackadaisical approach has sanctioned the leave encashment on 20.05.2014 but instead sending it before Treasury Office, Chatra, the last place of posting of the writ petitioner before his superannuation, had sent it to the Treasury Office, Deoghar and remained silent fairly for a period of about one year ten months and only on 02.03.2016 the amended sanctioned letter was issued and communicated to the office of the Accountant General. It appears from the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the Accountant General that in pursuance to the amended sanction order dated 02.03.2016 as contained in letter no.1460 issued by the Road Construction Department of the State of Jharkhand, the parent department of the writ petitioner, the office of the Accountant General issued a communication on 07.04.2016 requesting the Treasury Officer, Deoghar to send non-payment certificate and authority letter in original for further necessary action but even the Treasury Office, Deoghar remained silent by not responding to the letter issued by the office of the Accountant General dated 07.04.2016 which led the office of the Accountant General, Jharkhand to issue repeated reminders i.e. 16.09.2016, 19.09.2017 and further correspondence was made with the Deputy Commissioner, Deoghar i.e. 05.10.2017 and again reminder to the Deputy Commissioner, Deoghar on 11.10.2018 and only thereafter on 26.10.2018 the Treasury Office, Deoghar sent non-payment certificate and authority letter in original to the office of the Accountant General, in pursuance thereto, the office of the Accountant General issued revised authority letter to the Treasury Office, Chatra on 04.12.2018 and as such, according to our considered view the office of the Accountant General (A & E), Jharkhand, cannot be said to be at fault in causing delay in disbursement of the amount pertaining to leave encashment, rather it is the Road Construction Department of the State of Jharkhand who has committed gross negligence in issuing the sanction letter but not sending it to the proper destination i.e. the Treasury Office, Chatra and further it is the admitted fact that even the Treasury Office, Deoghar had not responded immediately on the basis of the correspondence made by the office of the Accountant General and therefore, the delay has been caused due to sheer negligence of the office of the Road Construction Department as also the Treasury Office, Deoghar. In view of such reasoning based upon the factual fact, we are of the considered view that the negligence will be attributed in causing delay in disbursement of the amount of leave encashment to the office of the Road Construction Department and the Treasury Office, Deoghar. 8. In view of such reasoning based upon the factual fact, we are of the considered view that the negligence will be attributed in causing delay in disbursement of the amount of leave encashment to the office of the Road Construction Department and the Treasury Office, Deoghar. 8. So far as liability on the part of the Executive Officer, Nagar Parishad, Chatra with respect to disbursement of the leave encashment is concerned, it would be evident from the stand reflected in the affidavit filed by the office of the Accountant General, as would appear at paragraph 16 there from that the Executive Officer, Nagar Parishad, Chatra on receipt of the authority letter dated 04.12.2018 has made correspondences to the office of the Accountant General vide letter dated 05.12.2019 i.e. after delay of exactly of one year, enquiring there from as authority letter was issued on 03.12.2018 so whether payment will be done on the same authority or fresh authority letter is required, however the same has been replied by the office of the Accountant General immediately on 19.12.2019 as would appear from para 17 of the Counter affidavit filed on behalf of the Accountant General. In view thereof, it can well be inferred by this Court that there is no laches on the part of the Executive Officer, Nagar Parishad, Chatra as because when the authority letter was issued by the office of the Accountant General on 04.12.2018, why the Executive Officer, Nagar Parishad kept mum instead of taking any decision on the authority letter dated 04.12.2018, rather making correspondence after one year there from i.e. on 05.12.2019. The statement made by the office of the Accountant General as under paragraph 16 and 17 thereof, no rebuttal reply has been filed by respondent nos.5 and 6 although counter affidavit on their behalf has been filed on 20.02.2020 and as such, we are of the view that the Nagar Parishad, Chatra, cannot be absolved from its liability in causing delay in disbursement of amount of the leave encashment. 9. 9. So far as the amount of group insurance is concerned, it would be evident from the affidavit filed on behalf of the State, as would appear from paragraph 9 thereof that sanction for group insurance was to be made by the Nagar Parishad, Chatra but since the Nagar Parishad, Chatra had delayed in sanctioning of GIC and the appellant-writ petitioner had requested the Road Construction Department, therefore, the Road Construction Department vide letter no.1462 dated 02.03.2016 sanctioned the amount of Rs.1,84,782/- against group insurance (GIC) which could not have been paid by the Road Construction Department due to non-removal of DDO Code by the Nagar Parishad which was only removed by the Nagar Parishad on 24.12.2019 and thereafter, the amount against the head of GIC was paid on 02.01.2020. It requires to refer herein that for disbursement of the amount of group insurance, the office of the Accountant General has no concern and as such no averment has been made in the counter affidavit filed on their behalf. The stand of the Nagar Parishad, Chatra, respondent nos.5 and 6 pertaining to disbursement of group insurance has been perused by this Court and as would appear from the statement made at paragraph 8 thereof, wherein it has been stated that the writ petitioner had never filed any petition in Chatra Nagar Parishad to remove DDO Code nor the parental department of the writ petitioner prior to 19.11.2019 directed/requested Nagar Parishad to remove DDO Code and only when a letter dated 19.11.2019 was received from the Deputy Secretary, Road Construction Department, the Nagar Parishad removed the DDO Code of the writ petitioner on 24.12.2019. It would be evident from the stand of the State of Jharkhand pertaining to disbursement of group insurance vis a vis stand of the Nagar Parishad, Chatra that the parent department of the writ petitioner was Road Construction and as such, liability to make payment of group insurance lies with the parent department of the writ petitioner i.e. the Road Construction Department and that is the reason the Road Construction Department had sanctioned the amount pertaining to GIC on 02.03.2016 for an amount of Rs.1,84,782/- but could not have been paid due to the Drawing and Disbursing Officer Code (DDO Code) was not removed by the Nagar Parishad, Chatra, which was only removed on 24.12.2019 while the Nagar Parishad, Chatra had taken the stand that no such letter had ever been issued by the parent department i.e. the Road Construction Department, addressing the Nagar Parishad, Chatra to remove DDO Code prior to 19.11.2019, rather the letter was issued by the concerned authority of the Road Construction Department on 19.11.2019, in pursuance thereto, Nagar Parishad, Chatra has removed the DDO Code of the writ petitioner on 24.12.2019. Further, the stand of the Road Construction Department of the State of Jharkhand, alleging against the Nagar Parishad, Chatra about non-removal of the DDO Code which according to the Road Construction Department was only removed on 24.12.2019 but the reason has been assigned by the Nagar Parishad, Chatra, as would appear at paragraph 8 to the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondent nos.5 and 6 as referred in the preceding paragraph. Therefore, it is admitted factual position that the amount of group insurance had been sanctioned on 02.03.2016, admittedly the writ petitioner was retired from service on 31.01.2012 but no reason has been assigned by the State of Jharkhand for causing delay of about four years from the date of retirement. Further, although the sanction order pertaining to GIC was issued on 02.03.2016 but even though knowing the fact that the writ petitioner has retired from service from Nagar Parishad, Chatra, but no correspondence was made by the Road Construction Department for removal of DDO code immediately even after sanction for GIC which was issued on 02.03.2016, rather it was only by way of communication issued on 19.11.2019 and in pursuance thereto, Nagar Parishad, Chatra removed the DDO Code of the writ petitioner on 24.12.2019. Further, the stand of the Road Construction Department of the State of Jharkhand, alleging against the Nagar Parishad, Chatra about non- removal of DDO Code, which according to the Road Construction Department was only removed on 24.12.2019 but the reason has been assigned by the Nagar Parishad, Chatra, as would appear at paragraph 8 to the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondent nos.5 and 6, but no rebuttal reply has been filed by the State of Jharkhand denying the said statement, however, the copy of the said affidavit has already been served upon the office of the learned Advocate General, therefore, this Court is of the view that the laches lies on the part of State of Jharkhand first in issuing the sanction order after delay of four years from the date of retirement of the writ petitioner and further, making correspondence about 2 and ½ years with the Nagar Parishad, Chatra for removal of DDO Code, as such, we are not hesitant to come to conclusion that fault lies on the part of Road Construction Department of the State of Jharkhand in disbursement of amount dues against GIC. 10. So far as difference in the dearness allowance is concerned, it would be evident from the statement made at paragraph 10 to the effect that the said payment was wholly the responsibility of the Nagar Parishad, Chatra, however, difference of dearness allowance to the tune of Rs.3,986/- was paid to the appellant on 24.12.2019 by the Nagar Parishad, Chatra, while on the other hand Nagar Parishad, Chatra has made a statement at paragraph 10 thereof that in the light of the letter no.5578(S) W.E dated 19.11.2019 issued by the Road Construction Department, the writ petitioner has been paid Rs.3,986/- vide Cheque no.743843 dated 24.12.2019 from the office of Nagar Parishad, Chatra, though the fund in this respect was not made available to the Nagar Parishad, Chatra. This Court after having considered the stand taken by the State of Jharkhand and the Nagar Parishad with respect to the delayed payment of dearness allowance, who admittedly have accepted that the delay has been caused in making payment of Rs.3,986/- as would appear from paragraph 10 of the affidavit filed on behalf of the Road Construction Department of the State of Jharkhand and paragraph 10 of the affidavit filed on behalf of Nagar Parishad and therefore, we are of the view that the writ petitioner is not at any fault in any way and hence, not making payment of difference of dearness allowance has also been caused either by the respondent State of Jharkhand or by the Nagar Parishad. 11. This Court on the basis of the discussion made hereinabove, have come to the conclusion that there is no delay caused on the part of the writ petitioner, so far as it relates to disbursement of leave encashment, group insurance and difference of dearness allowance. 12. 11. This Court on the basis of the discussion made hereinabove, have come to the conclusion that there is no delay caused on the part of the writ petitioner, so far as it relates to disbursement of leave encashment, group insurance and difference of dearness allowance. 12. The learned Single Judge, in the impugned order has rejected the claim about payment of interest on account of delayed payment, merely on the ground that it was the duty of the writ petitioner to submit the pension paper within six months from the date of retirement, but the case of the writ petitioner was not for release of the pension and gratuity so paper required to be submitted within six months from the date of superannuation rather there is no requirement to submit paper for disbursement of leave encashment, group insurance and difference of dearness allowance, this contention of the learned senior counsel appearing for the writ petitioner as also the ground upon which the intra-court appeal has been filed, we are in agreement with the same as because so far as the submission of the pension papers within six months from the date of retirement, the requirement to submit the pension papers for fixation of realisation of pension as also the death cum retiral gratuity, since it pertains to the applicable pension rule but so far as leave encashment, group insurance and difference of dearness allowance, the same does not come under the purview of the applicable pension rule and therefore, the requirement of submission of document within six months from the date of retirement is not required and as such, the finding/reasoning recorded by the learned Single Judge, negating the interest upon the delayed payment on the ground that the pension paper has not been submitted by the writ petitioner within the period of six months from the date of retirement, is having no basis, accordingly, we are not in agreement with the reasoning/finding recorded by the learned Single Judge and, therefore, are of the view that the order passed by the learned Single Judge, is not sustainable in the eye of law, accordingly, the same is quashed and set aside. Now the question would be, if there is no delay on the part of the writ petitioner, will he be entitled for the interest on the delayed payment of the amount under the aforesaid heads i.e. leave encashment, group insurance and difference of dearness allowance? So far as amount payable to the writ petitioner vis-a-vis group insurance claim, Rule 11 of the Bihar Government Servant’s Compulsory Group Insurance Rules, 1979, shall govern the field. Rule 11 reads as under: “11. Repayment in case of superannuation, resignation, dismissal, discharge, permanent change of cadre of officer of All-India Services, etc. In case of superannuation, resignation, dismissal, discharge, etc. the Government shall be paid the entire amount of contributions made plus 6 per cent compound interest in one lump sum as shown in Appendix ‘A’.” Therefore, it is evident from the statutory rule applicable pertaining to disbursement of group insurance scheme as per the provision of Rule 11, the employee will be entitled for entire amount of contributions made plus 6% compound interest in one lump sum and as such, the writ petitioner is entitled for the entire amount of contributions made plus 6% compound interest, however, the issue does not pertain to the disbursement of entire amount of contribution made plus 6 per cent compound interest herein, since it is the case of payment of interest on account of delayed payment. 13. This Court has gone across the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court rendered in the case of Vijay L. Mehrotra vs. State of U.P. and Ors. reported in (2001) 9 SCC 687 , the factual aspect involved therein is for disbursement of the retiral benefits, which according to the Hon’ble Apex Court should be paid on the date of retirement or soon thereafter if for some unforeseen circumstances the payments could not be made on the date of retirement itself. Further, it has been ordered that if there is any delay showing no reason of justification for years together a direction has been passed directing the respondent to pay the retiral benefits along with the simple interest @ 18% with effect from the date of retirement till the date of payment. 14. Further, it has been ordered that if there is any delay showing no reason of justification for years together a direction has been passed directing the respondent to pay the retiral benefits along with the simple interest @ 18% with effect from the date of retirement till the date of payment. 14. This Court, on the basis of the discussion made hereinabove, considering the rival stand having been taken by the concerned respondents and since we have reached to the conclusion since there is no fault lies on the part of the writ petitioner, rather laches lies on the part of the respondents i.e. Road Construction Department of the State of Jharkhand or the Nagar Parishad, Chatra and as such, the fact is apparent as per the material available on record that there is delay in making payment to the appellant-writ petitioner and as such, the appellant-writ petitioner is entitled for interest component on the length of delay. The question to be considered as to what should be the quantum of interest, since in the judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court rendered in the case of Vijay L. Mehrotra vs. State of U.P. and Ors. (supra), the simple interest @ 18% has been imposed. But as would appear from the facts of the aforesaid case simple interest @ 18% has been imposed. Considering the fact that the entire retiral benefits has not been paid to the appellant of the said case but here the factual aspect is different to the effect that all the pensionary benefits including the full and final pension, gratuity and GPF have already been paid and therefore, we find no justification in saddling the State Exchequer by imposing 18% rather, we deem it fit and proper to impose the interest @ 6% per annum. This Court is very much concerned for the laches committed on the part of the authority of the State of Jharkhand, the public exchequer may not suffer but simultaneously, if the delay has been caused, the employee cannot be allowed to suffer and therefore, this Court hereby directs to disburse the amount of interest @ 6% per annum from the date of retirement till the date of its payment over the amount of leave encashment, group insurance and the difference of dearness allowance to be paid to the writ petitioner within a period of three months from the date of receipt of copy of the order. This Court, considering the fact that the interest on account of delayed payment will cause burden upon the State Exchequer, deem it fit and proper to direct the State of Jharkhand through the Principal Secretary, Road Construction Department and the Secretary, Urban Department to make an enquiry about the delay caused in making payment of leave encashment, group insurance and the difference of dearness allowance in favour of the writ petitioner and accordingly fix liability after providing opportunity to defend one or the other official/officials and the amount which have been paid from the State Exchequer as directed above shall be recovered from the erring officials to be deposited in the State Exchequer. 15. With this observation and direction, the instant appeal stands allowed and the writ petition also stands allowed to the extent as directed hereinabove.