1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR. O R D E R S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION No.8997/2002. : : Purshottam Kahtri Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. : : Date of Order 9.7.2008 HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ None present for the petitioner. Mr.Shiv Lal Meena, Dy.Govt.Counsel for the State. This writ petition was filed by the petitioner with a prayer that respondents be directed to pay his pension such as gratuity, leave encasement, P.F., State Insurance and other retiral benefits. The petitioner while he was working as District Education officer with the respondents sought voluntarily retirement and was allowed to voluntarily retire on 27.5.2002. In reply to the writ petition, the respondents have submitted that in obtaining relevant information and records some time was consumed, therefore, delay in payment of pension was caused. The pension case was proceeded and then it was finalised and the order of payment of pension order etc. were issued on 10.1.2003. The other retiral 2 benefits of the petitioner have also been paid. The writ petition according to the respondents has become infructuous. Rule 89 of the Rajasthan Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1996 interalia provides that in exceptional circumstances, if the payment of retiral benefits has been authorised after 60 days from the date when its payment became due, and it is clearly established that the delay in payment was not on account of failure on the part of the Government servant to comply with the procedure laid down in the Rules, interest @ 9% per annum for the period beyond 60 days after retiral benefits become due would be payable till the end of the month preceding the month in which the retiral benefits are authorized. Rate of interest was modified and enhanced to 12% per annum vide notification of the Government Circular dated 12.12.2001. Nothing has been brought on record that it was due to any fault on the part of the petitioner that the payments were delayed. The respondents have not categorically stated the other payments due to the petitioner such as leave encashment, provident fund etc paid even if it was contended by the respondents that the petitioner produced no dues certificate timely on 5.9.2002. According to the aforesaid 3 rules, they were required to finalize his pension case within two months from such date. Any period of delay that was made beyond 5.9.2002 would thus be attributable to the respondents themselves. The petitioner is held entitled to interest @ 12% per annum for such period of delay according to the rule aforesaid. The payment of interest starting from 5.11.2002 till the actual payments were made shall be paid to him within a period of three months from the date, copy of this order is produced by petitioner before the respondent No.2 for compliance. The writ petition stands allowed in part in the terms indicated above. (MOHAMMAD RAFIQ)J. A.Arora/- Item No.69.