IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TWENTIETH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO : 23388 of 2008 Between: M. Hara Bhupal S/o. M. Narasimha Rao R/o. H.No.11-13-763/1, Plot No.23, Road No.3/A, Green Hills Colony, Saroor Nagar P.O., Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Union of India Rep. by its Secretary to the Govt. Ministry of Home Affairs, North Block, New Delhi - 110 001. 2 The Director Intelligence Bureau North Block, New Delhi - 110 001. 3 The Pay and Accounts Officer IB, MHA. New Delhi. 4 The Joint Director Subsidiary Intelligence Bureau, (M.H.A., Govt. of India) 4-5-368.373, Sultan Bazaar, Hyderabad - 500 095. .....RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to to issue an order or direction one in the nature of Mandamus: a) Declaring the action of the respondents in not paying the interest to the petitioner at 18% p.a. compound, on the excess amount of Rs.12,929/- which was illegally collected from the Petitioner on 7-11-2002 and retained till 29-2-2008, is arbitrary and illegal and contrary to the rules and set aside the order of CAT, Hyderabad dated 20-6-2008 passed in O.A.No.161/08 which had been upheld in R.A.No.17/2008, b) directing the authorities to pay interest to the petitioner at 18% p.a. compound on the excess amount of Rs.12,929/- collected from the Petitioner and retained by them from 07-11-2002 to 29-02-2008; c) and costs are awarded; Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.M.RAMA RAO Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.A.RAJASHEKAR REDDY (ASST SOLICITOR GEN) The Court made the following : ORDER: (Per Sri Justice GHULAM MOHAMMED) This Writ Petition has been filed with the following prayer: “ It is therefore, prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue an order or direction one in the nature of Mandamus: (a) declaring the action of the respondents in not paying the interest to the petitioner at 18% p.a. compound, on the excess amount of Rs. 12,929/- which was illegally collected from the petitioner on 7.11.2002 and retained till 29.2.2008 is arbitrary and illegal and contrary to the rules and set aside the order of CAT, Hyderabad dated 20.6.2008 passed in O.A.No. 161/03 which had been upheld in R.A.No. 17/2008. (b) directing the authorities to pay interest to the petitioner at 18% p.a. compound on the excess amount of Rs. 12,929/- collected from the petitioner and retained by them from 7.11.2002 to 29.2.2008. (c) and costs are awarded. And pass such other order or orders as deemed fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.” Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner obtained House Building Advance (for short HBA) of Rs. 64,000/- in 1985 from the Department of Intelligence Bureau, for construction of flat at Delhi through a cooperative group housing society, in terms of the Ministry of Works and Housing, Government of India, OM No. I/17011/1/80-H- III dated 5.3.1983, through letter-dated 29.1.1985. In the said O.M dated 5.3.1983 it had been categorically mentioned that the HBA could be granted to the Central Government Employees without the necessity of mortgaging the land or the flat in favour of the President of India where such flats are constructed through cooperative group housing societies, subject to the condition that the applicant shall execute a personal bond and furnish surety bonds. The prescribed rates of interest in the HBA sanction order were 9.5%, 11% and 13% respectively i.e., inflated by 2.5% as per HBA Rules and the Government Servant shall be entitled for 2.5% rebate on the interest in case the Government Employee fulfils conditions prescribed under various O.Ms issued by the Central Government. It is stated that the respondents have calculated the interest without applying the rebate to the petitioner and insisted that he pay the full amount without applying the rebate. After paying the entire amount by 7.11.2002 as insisted upon by the authorities, it is stated that the petitioner made a representation on 18.11.2002 and again on 16.3.2005 to the authorities to refund the excess amount paid by him. As the authorities did not respond, he approached the Central Administrative Tribunal on 11.9.2006 by filing O.A.No. 622 of 2006 for grant of 2.5% rebate in interest and for refund of the excess amount paid with interest. The said O.A was disposed of by an order dated 2.4.2007 directing the authorities to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 16.3.2005 pending before them and pass appropriate orders as per the rule and communicate the same to him within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of the order of the Tribunal. Thereafter, the second respondent passed orders on 4.7.2007 granting 2.5% rebate on the interest and ultimately the excess amount arrived at, being Rs. 12,929/-, was refunded to the petitioner on 29.2.2008 after a lapse of 5 years 4 months and 22 days that is nearly five and half years. Hence, the petitioner asserts that he is entitled for interest on the said excess amount which was illegally collected on 7.11.2002 and retained for so long. It is stated that he made a representation dated 11.7.2007 requesting the authorities to pay interest. In turn the authorities through letter-dated 8.10.2007 rejected the same. Against the same the petitioner filed another representation on 10.12.2007 but the authorities rejected that application under Memo dated 4.1.2008. Therefore, he was forced to approach the Central Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad by filing O.A.No. 161 of 2008 challenging the said proceedings and also praying for payment of compound interest at 18% per annum on the excess amount collected. The Tribunal, without actually discussing the issue in the O.A, dismissed the same by an order-dated 20.6.2008. Against the said order the petitioner filed a review petition and the same was also dismissed by order-dated 11.8.2008. Challenging the order dated 20.6.2008 passed in the O.A, the present Writ Petition has been filed. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Sri M. Rama Rao, vehemently contended that the authorities collected excess amount and therefore the petitioner made a representation dated 18.11.2002 to refund the excess amount but as the authorities have not responded, he approached the Tribunal and the impugned order passed by the tribunal does not disclose the amount of interest. He also contended that as per the Interest Act he is entitled to interest from the date of his representation as the authorities have illegally withheld the amount without any justification. On the other hand, the learned Assistant Solicitor General for India, appearing for the respondents, contended that the petitioner is not entitled for any interest. We have perused the impugned order. It is not in dispute that the petitioner obtained House Building Advance of Rs. 64,000/- in 1985 from the Department of Intelligence Bureau for construction of a flat at Delhi through a cooperative group housing society. It is also not in dispute that the prescribed rates of interest in HBA sanctioned order were 9.5%, 11% and 13% respectively i..e, inflated by 2.5% as per HBA rules. It is also not in dispute that the authorities calculated the interest without applying the rebate to the petitioner and insisted that he pay the full amount. He paid the entire amount by 7.11.2002 and after that he made a representation on 18.11.2002 and again on 16.3.2005 to refund the excess amount paid by him. As the authorities have not responded, he approached the Central Administrative Tribunal on 11.9.2006 by filing O.A.No. 622 of 2006 and the Tribunal, by an order dated 8.2.2008, disposed of the same granting one month time to the respondents 1 and 3 to see that the amount required to be paid shall be paid to the applicant. Thereafter, the second respondent passed orders on 4.7.2007 granting 2.5% rebate on the interest and ultimately the excess amount arrived at Rs. 12,929/- was refunded to the petitioner on 29.2.2008 after a long lapse of five years and nearly two years after the grant of the rebate under the Order dated 4.7.2007. Meanwhile, the petitioner made a representation dated 11.7.2007 requesting the authorities to pay interest and the same was rejected by the authorities through letter dated 8.10.2007 and Memo dated 4.1.2008. Hence, he filed O.A.No. 161 of 2008 and the same was also dismissed by an order dated 11.8.2008. As seen from the facts and circumstances, the authorities have illegally withheld the amount for more than five years. In the circumstances, we deem it appropriate to grant interest at 6% per annum with effect from 18.11.2002 to 29.2.2008. Therefore, the respondents are directed to pay compound interest at the rate of 6% per annum on the excess amount collected i.e., Rs. 12,929/- for the said period within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. _____________________________ GHULAM MOHAMMED, J ______________________________ SANJAY KUMAR , J Dt. 20.1.2009 KA ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1 The Union of India Rep. by its Secretary to the Govt. Ministry of Home Affairs, North Block, New Delhi - 110 001. 2 The Director Intelligence Bureau North Block, New Delhi - 110 001. 3 The Pay and Accounts Officer IB, MHA. New Delhi. 4 The Joint Director Subsidiary Intelligence Bureau, (M.H.A., Govt. of India) 4-5-368.373, Sultan Bazaar, Hyderabad - 500 095. 5. 2 CD copies