IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH CWP No.7679 of 2008 Date of decision: January 20, 2009 Parma Nand ... Petitioner Versus State of Haryana & others ... Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI Present : Mr. Deepak Balyan, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Harish Rathee, Sr. DAG, Haryana. *** 1. Whether Reporters of Local Newspapers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? AJAY TEWARI, J.(Oral) This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner for the release of all due retiral benefits. Learned State counsel states that all the retiral benefits have since been released. However, learned counsel for the petitioner prays for interest on the retiral dues on the ground that there was an inordinate delay. Learned counsel for respondents states that the delay occurred due to pendency of the case before the Hon'ble Supreme Court and it was only thereafter that the pensionary benefits as demanded by the petitioner could have been released. Even though it can be justifiably said that there was no fault of the respondents in delaying the benefits yet it can also not be gainsaid that the monies which belonged to the petitioner were retained by the respondents. CWP No.7679 of 2008 -2- In the circumstances, it would be in the interest of justice if the respondents are directed to pay 8% interest starting from six months after the date of retirement till the date of payment of retiral dues within 3 months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. In case the payment is not made in the said period then further interest @ 8% per month on the amount of interest also would be payable to the petitioner. Consequently, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. January 20, 2009 (AJAY TEWARI) sonia JUDGE