WP(C) 6300/2007 BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJAN GOGOI. Heard Mr. A. K. Sarma, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. D. Saikia, lea rned Standing Counsel, Health Department. Having regard to the subject matter involved and as affidavit of the departmenta l Secretary has been filed in terms of the order of the Court dated 01.2.2008 fi nal orders in the writ petition are being passed at the motion stage. The petitioner is the wife of one Dr. J. P. Bhattacharjee who died on 23.6.2002. The deceased, during his lifetime instituted a writ proceeding before this Cour t i.e. Civil Rule No.147 of 1995 which was disposed of by order dated 21.5.2002. By the said order this Court directed the respondents in the writ petition to r elax the relevant provisions of the service Rules in force, to regularize the pr omotion of the husband of the petitioner to the post of Additional Chief Medical and Health Officer made by order dated 11.2.1988 as well as his promotion to th e post of Chief Medical and Health Officer made by order dated 28.6.1988. Therea fter, the pay of the husband of the petitioner in the higher posts was directed to be fixed including the pay in the revised scale effective from 1.1.1989. On t he basis of such higher pay, as may be fixed, computation of pensionary benefits to the husband of the petitioner (he having retired on 28.2.1989) was directed to be made by the respondents and on the basis of such computation/calculation a rrear and current pension was ordered to be paid. The whole exercise was made ti me-bound by the Court by its order dated 21.5.2002 whereby an outer limit of thr ee months was stipulated for carrying out the directions of the Court. As the sa id order of the Court dated 21.5.2002 passed in Civil Rule No.147 of 1995 has no t been complied with, till date, this writ petition has been filed. The affidavit filed by the departmental Secretary today i.e. 15th of February 20 08, indicates that the order dated 21.5.2002 passed by the Court in Civil Rule N o.147 of 1995 has not been complied with till date as the service record of the petitioner had got misplaced on account of shifting of the office of the Secreta riat on as many as three occasions. However, in the affidavit filed by the Secre tary it has been stated that steps have now been taken to reconstruct the servic e record of the petitioner and on that basis the order of the Court dated 21.5.2 002 passed in Civil Rule No.147 of 1995 will now be implemented to ensure that t he petitioner receives the dues payable to her within 30th of April 2008. At the hearing Sri Saikia, learned Standing Counsel, Health Department, has furt her elaborated that the reconstructions of the service record of the petitioner’ s husband is almost going to be shortly over whereafter the matter will be sent to the office of the Accountant General and the department is hopeful that the A ccountant General will accord the necessary sanction so as to enable payment to the petitioner to be made within the month of April 2008. The facts of the case leaves the Court distressed. The petitioner’s husband, a pensioner, was accorded certain benefits by the Court which however did not mate rialize during his lifetime as soon after the order of the Court dated 21.5.2002 in Civil Rule No.147 of 1995 was passed the petitioner’s husband passed away in the month of June 2002. Thereafter, the petitioner as the widow was entitled to receive the benefits due to her deceased husband as ordered by the Court. A per iod of nearly six years has elapsed in the meantime but the order of the Court r emains unimplemented. The reason cited for non-implementation of the Court order i.e. the service record of the petitioner’s husband was misplaced also lacks an y foundation inasmuch what is the precise date or time on which the said record had got misplaced has not been indicated to the Court. That apart, if the said r ecord had got misplaced why steps had not been taken to reconstruct the said rec ord until the petitioner moved the Court for the second time has also not been e xplained. Surely, such a situation cannot be tolerated in a system governed by t he Rule of law. However, as the departmental Secretary has now assured the Court that the petitioner will receive the dues payable to her by the end of the mont h of April 2008 the Court is of the view that the matter need not be pursued any further, save and except that the payment due will be made latest by the end of the month of April 2008. This direction will also apply to the Accountant Gener al who will examine the matter and render his decision on the entitlement of the petitioner within such time so as to enable the present directions of the Court to be carried out. Thereafter, regular pension of the petitioner shall also be paid from the month of May 2008. The Court is also of the view that as the petitioner has been wrongly denied the benefit due to her which denial has persisted over an unreasonable long period of time the amount due to the petitioner should carry interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date coincident with the expiry of three months after the or der dated 21.5.2002 rendered by this Court in Civil Rule No.147 of 1995 till the date of actual payment. Needless to say, the department i.e. the Health Departm ent, will be at liberty to identify the officer/officers responsible for the afo resaid lapse and recover the interest from the pay or pension of such Officer(s) who are found to be responsible. Writ petition, consequently, is allowed in terms of the above directions.