IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP (T) No. 5892 of 2008 Decided on : 15.11.2010 Kalyan Singh ..…Petitioner. Versus State of H.P and another …… Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice V.K. Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 No. For the Petitioner : Ms Anjula Khajuria, Advocate. For respondents : Mr. R.M. Bisht, Dy. A.G. V.K.Sharma, Judge (Oral) The petition has been filed for grant of the following substantive relief vide para 7(i):- “That the respondents may be directed to pay the pension, gratuity, and other retiral benefits admissible to him w.e.f 30.11.98 i.e date of superannuation with 16% interest for delayed payment.” 2. In reply on behalf of the respondents, the following averments have been set up vide paras 3 and 6:- “3. That in reply to para No.3, it is submitted that the case of retiral benefit could not be decided, because the applicant sent his case for re-fixation in the selection grade of Rs. 3700-5700 to the Government near the date of his retirement alongwith Service Book which is under the consideration of the Government. 6. That in reply to this para it is submitted that as the service record was sent to the Government for re-fixation in the selection grade, hence, the process regarding retiral 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? No. . 2 benefits could not be completed well within time. The retiral benefit will be decided as soon as the case of the re-fixation is decided which may take some time.” 3. However, as per paras 3, 6 and 7 of the rejoinder, which are extracted below, a sum of Rs.7,52,138/- has since been paid to the petitioner towards retrial benefits, though belatedly by more than one year, without there being any fault of the petitioner:- “3. That the contents of this para are totally wrong hence, denied. It is respectfully submitted that rather the service book was mis-placed by the Directorate but the same was under consideration after filing this Original Application. The respondent did not bothered before this Original Application even on the applicants legal notice which was sent in February, and is annexed with the Original Application. 6 & 7. That in rejoinder to these paras it is, submitted that the applicant has received all the retrial benefits except interest on that amount. The respondent/department is responsible for delay an according to rule the responsibility of paying interest is upon respondent/department. The applicant received commuted pension on Nov, 19, 1999 after one year, GIS received on 5th April, 2000 and gratuity received on 5th December, 1999 more than one year. The whole amount received by the applicant after one year or more. The total amount received by the applicant is Rs. 7,52,138/- so 3 the respondents are liable to pay 16% interest on whole amount from the date of superannuation.” 4. The learned Dy. Advocate General, submits that there is always a grace period of three months for payment of retiral benefits to the retiree from the date of retirement. If it is so, interest @ 6% per annum shall be payable to the petitioner for the belated payment beyond the grace period of three months till the date of actual payment, which shall be paid within three months from the date of production of copy of this judgment by the petitioner within one month, failing which higher interest @ 9% per annum shall be payable. 5. The writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms, so also the pending application(s), if any. (V.K. Sharma) Judge 15th November, 2010. Lsp*