IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP (T) No. 5516 of 2008. Decided on: 27th October, 2010. Ram Lok Sood. .….. Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. …. .. Respondent. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph, Chief Justice The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kuldip Singh, Judge. For the petitioner : Mr. Surinder Saklani, Advocate vice Mr. B.S. Parmar, Advocate. For the Respondent : Mr. Ankush Dass Sood, Addl. Advocate General. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Justice Kurian Joseph, C.J. (Oral) The writ petition is filed with the following prayers: “(i) That the respondent may please be directed to pay interest at the rate of 18% per annum on the amount of Rs.1,04,976/- w.e.f. 1.9.1994 till 8.9.1997. (ii) That the respondent be also directed to pay the damages at the rate of 12% per annum on the amount due or any other amount as this Hon’ble Tribunal deems fit in the circumstances of the case.” 2. In the preliminary objections of the reply at paras 1 and 2, it is stated as follows: “1. The applicant retired from Government Service on 31.8.94 and on that date he was facing common proceedings in Kainthla Commission of Enquiry and as such the amount of DCRG was not released as per provisions contained in Rule 69(e) of CCS(Pension) Rules 1972. Similarly, the application for commutation of pension was sent to the Sr. Dy. Accountant General, HP on receipt of final orders in the inquiry as per provisions contained in Rule 4 of 2 Chapter II of CCS & (Commutation of Pension Rules, 1981). 2. The final decision in the enquiry was received on 21.5.97. According to the findings of the Inquiring Authority the applicant has been ordered to be exonerated and the sanction order to release the DCRG was accordingly issued on 30.6.97 to the Superintendent of Police (Vigilance) with a copy to the retiree, for making further payment to the applicant and no intentional delay was made to release the DCRG and as such the applicant is not entitled for the interest.” 3. In case the petitioner as any dispute with regard to the factual and legal position, as stated above, it will be open to the petitioner to pursue the same in appropriate proceedings before appropriate forum. However, we make it clear that in case the petitioner initiates such steps within a period of one month from today, the same shall not be rejected on the only ground of delay. In the event of the petitioner approaching the Government, the matter will be decided within a period of three months from the date of production of a copy of this judgment by the petitioner. 4. The writ petition is disposed of, so also the pending applications, if any.Dasti copy. (Justice Kurian Joseph), Chief Justice 27th October, 2010 (Justice Kuldip Singh), (tr) Judge.