IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH COCP No.1491 of 2009 (O&M) Date of decision: September 23, 2009. Ishwar Singh ...Petitioner(s) v. Ajit M.Sharan & Ors. ...Respondent(s) CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG Present: None for the petitioner. Shri Ashok Jindal, Additional Advocate General, Haryana for the respondents. ORDER Rakesh Kumar Garg, J. (Oral): In response to the show cause notice issued by this Court, separate replies have been filed on behalf of the respondents. In the affidavit of Shri O.P. Sheoran – respondent No.2, it has been stated as under:- “That in compliance of the above order, the concerned Authority, i.e., Sub Division Officer (Civil) Hansi immediately proceeded to take steps for disbursing he interest for the period from the accrual of arrear to the actual date of disbursement and same has been paid to petitioner by the Sub Divisional Officer (Civil) Hansi vide his bill No.575 dated 01-06-2009 for the period 13.5.2005 to 18.2.2009 for Rs.24449/- has been received by the petitioner on dated 09- 06-2009. Further interest amounting to Rs.3,657/- for the period from 19.2.2009 to 2.9.2009 has also been drawn vide bill No.692 and the petitioner was requested to collect it telephonically 2.9.2009 by the Sub Divisional Officer (Civil) Hansi and petitioner refused to collect. It is further pertinent to mention here that sanction regarding revised pension payment order, death-cum-retirement gratuity and commutation of pension has been issued by the Account General (A&E) Haryana Chandigarh vide his office No. Pension -5/1-507/2005-06/GO/445377/166324-26, Pension -5/COM No.263461/HR/1-507/2006-06/166330-32, Pension -5/1-507/2005-06/166333-35 DATED 10.9.2009.” In view of the aforesaid reply filed by the respondent and the fact that there is no assistance from the petitioner, I am not inclined to proceed further in this case. Rule discharged. September 23, 2009. [ Rakesh Kumar Garg ] kadyan Judge