IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN THURSDAY, THE 2ND APRIL 2009 / 12TH CHAITHRA 1931 OP.No. 36092 of 2002(V) ----------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- P.V.AUGUSTY S/O. VAREED, PALISSERIL HOUSE, KALADY KARA, KALADY P.O. BY ADV. SMT.P.V.KOCHUTHRESIA RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. SECRETARY, KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, VYDYUTHI BHAVAN, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 2. CHIEF ENGINEER (HRM), KSEB., VYDYUTHI BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-4 3. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, ELECTRICAL DIVISION, PERUMBAVOOR. ADV. SRI.C.K.KARUNAKARAN, SC, KSEB THIS ORIGINAL PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 02/04/2009, THE COURT ON 02/04/2009 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: O.P.No. 36092/02. APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS P1. COPY OF THE ORDER DTD.1.11.01 BY R2. Sdk+ ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ================== O.P.No. 36092 of 2002 ================== Dated this the 2nd day of April, 2009 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is a retired employee of the KSEB. In this original petition he is seeking a direction to the respondents to pay him interest on the DCRG and commuted value of pension paid to him belatedly. 2. The contention of the respondents is that the petitioner is not entitled to any interest in so far as the delay occurred only on account of the petitioner's own conduct. The petitioner retired from service on 31.7.2001. As per Rule 110 of Part III KSR, an employee, who is to retire from service, has to forward his pension papers at least one year prior to his date of retirement. But in this case, the petitioner forwarded his pension papers only on 25.5.2001 and amounts due to the petitioner were paid on 20.9.2002 and 21.1.2009. 3. I have considered the contentions in detail. 4. I am not inclined to consider the claim of the petitioner in this original petition in so far as in view of the decision in V.Vijayakumaran Nair v. State Bank of Travancore & Anr. [2005 (1) KLT 547], wherein this Court has held that in case a person is claiming interest alone in respect of his retirement benefits, he must be relegated to the remedy by way of a civil suit. In the above circumstances, this original petition is dismissed without prejudice to the right to the petitioner to file a suit for the same cause of action. Sd/- sdk+ S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ================== O.P.No. 36092 of 2002-V ================== J U D G M E N T 2nd April, 2009