ORDER : Rohit Arya, J. 1. This writ petition has a chequered history. However, the relevant facts necessary for disposal of the writ petition are adumbrated. The petitioner; a Lab Technician had approached this Court filing writ petition vide W.P. No. 4969/2014 seeking writ of certiorari and mandamus for quashment of the impugned notification of retirement dated 18/03/2014 and a command to the respondents to allow the petitioner to continue up to the age of 62 years. According to his date of birth, petitioner would reach the age of 62 years on 31/08/2016. The Writ Court had granted interim relief in July, 2014 directing for continuance of the petitioner until further orders. The writ petition was allowed on 29/09/2015 and both the reliefs were granted to the petitioner. However, the petitioner was not permitted to join the duties. This led to filing of a contempt petition. In the reply, respondents under the pretext of pendency of writ appeal against the order passed by the writ Court justified non-implementation of the order of writ Court, as there were writ appeals; vide W.A. No. 26/2016 by the State Government and W.A. No. 03/2016 by the petitioner. The writ appeal filed by the State was dismissed on 28/04/2016 affirming the order of the writ Court and W.A. No. 03/2016 was also allowed with a direction to the State to pay 100% back wages to the petitioner. Eventually, petitioner was allowed to resume on 27/02/2016 and worked up to 31/08/2016. However, outstanding dues of wages were paid to him on 06/06/2016. Petitioner's retiral dues were also delayed and finally released on 08/11/2017. 2. Petitioner has approached this Court for the following reliefs:- 1. Interest @ 12.5% on delayed payment of salary from the date salary was due till the payment i.e. from 01/09/2014 till 06/06/2016; 2. Interest upon the payment of Rs. 23,440/- paid towards two annual increments payable to the petitioner though due on July, 2015 and 2016, but actually paid on 18/12/2017; 3. Interest @ 12.5% on delayed payment of gratuity, leave encashment and pension. These amounts were due on 01/09/2016, whereas the same were paid on 28/12/2017. 3. Per contra, Ms. Interest upon the payment of Rs. 23,440/- paid towards two annual increments payable to the petitioner though due on July, 2015 and 2016, but actually paid on 18/12/2017; 3. Interest @ 12.5% on delayed payment of gratuity, leave encashment and pension. These amounts were due on 01/09/2016, whereas the same were paid on 28/12/2017. 3. Per contra, Ms. Kirti Patwardhan, learned counsel for the contesting respondent No. 2 contends that petitioner was a Lab Technician and not a Teacher therefore, the age of retirement was 60 years, hence, the retirement notification dated 18/03/2014 was issued retiring the petitioner on 31/08/2014. It was only through the verdict in writ petition, petitioner's status as lab technician was held to at par with the teacher therefore, the petitioner was allowed to continue up to age of 62 years by the force of judgment so rendered by the writ Court. Hence the bonafide of respondents are beyond the pale of doubt in the matter of issuance of notification dated 18/03/2014. Therefore, petitioner was not held entitled for the interest for the period from 18/03/2014 till he joins on 27/02/2016. 4. To bolster her submissions, she further submits that controversy in that behalf, eventually set at rest after dismissal of the SLP dated 05/07/2018 by the Hon'ble Supreme Court filed by the respondent No. 2 against the order passed in W.A. No. 26/2016. She further submits that all dues towards wages, salary and pension have been paid to the petitioner. The delay, if any caused in payment of pensionary dues is attributable to calculation and administrative approval for preparation of PPO(s) etc., for release of the amount dues. She also submits that the claim for interest upon the amount due arises if there was a deliberate inaction or avoidance on the part of the respondents. None of these reasons exist in the matter of release of the amounts due, hence, the petitioner is not entitled for the interest claimed. 5. Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties, this Court finds substantial force in the submissions advanced by Shri Aviral Khare to the extent of claim of interest on the amount due as marshalled in preceding paragraphs for the reason that; after the writ petition was allowed on 29/09/2015, in all fairness, petitioner should have been allowed to perform the duties as the offending notification dated 18/03/2014 was quashed. After quashment, the continuity of the petitioner has to be reckoned from the date he was not allowed to perform the duties i.e. 31/08/2014. Unfortunately, that was not done. Petitioner has been allowed to join only on 27/02/2016 for no fault on his part. Hence, the claim for interest for the period from 01/09/2014 to 26/02/2016 on arrears of salary on the post of Lab Technician is held to be fully justified. Nevertheless, this Court awards the interest @ 9% in exercise of equitable jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 6. Petitioner undisputedly was entitled for two annual increments amounting to Rs. 23,440/-. In normal course, the amount should have been paid to the petitioner in the month of July of each year, whereas, the arrears of benefit of increments were paid in a consolidated manner on 18/12/2017. For the reasons stated above, the petitioner is also held entitled for the interest @ 9% from the date due till the payment each year. 7. Petitioner reached the age of superannuation on 31/08/2016. No reason much less plausible reason has been assigned in the counter-affidavit for withholding of the pensionary dues which otherwise are legally payable to the petitioner upon retirement. For no wrong on the part of petitioner, legitimate dues were withheld, when petitioner was in the evening of his life after rendering more than 30 years of valuable services for respondents. 8. Under such circumstances, petitioner is held entitled for interest @ 9% for the period from 01/09/2016 till the payment of dues. 9. In view of the aforesaid, the writ petition is allowed with the following directions:- 1. that the petitioner shall make a consolidated representation working out the amount of interest payable to him and submit it along with a copy of this order within seven working days before respondent No. 2; 2. in turn, the respondent No. 2 shall advert to the same and upon verification of the amount due, shall release the interest without any further delay within a period of three weeks from the date of submission of the representation. If the amount so ordered is not released, further compound interest shall accrue upon the due amount @ 9%. 10. With the aforesaid, the writ petition stands allowed and disposed of. 11. Certified copy as per rules.