IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWELFTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO : 9148 of 2009 Between: S. Kumar, S/o. Rajanna, E.No. 854504675, R/. Chennareddy Palli, Pittigunta (P), Kalasapadu (M), Kadapa District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Central Industrial Security Force, Rep by its Director General, Block No. 13, CGO's Complex, Lodhi Road, New Delhi. 2 Central Industrial Security Force, Rep by its Commandant, A.S.G. IGI Airport, New Delhi. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue writ, order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not paying the retiral benefits and pension to the petitioner even though petitioner was retired from his service w.e.f 31-5-2008 as illegal, arbitrary, unjust and violation of Article 21 of the constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to pay the retiral benefits with interest and also interest for delay payment of gratuity for the period 31-5-2008 to 24-3-2009 to the petitioner. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.B.SHIVA KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.A.RAJASHEKAR REDDY (ASST SOLICITOR GEN) The Court made the following : HONOURABLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION No.9148 of 2009 ORDER: This writ petition is filed seeking a declaration that the action of the respondents in not paying the retrial benefits and pension to the petitioner is arbitrary and illegal. The petitioner also claims interest over the retrial benefits payable to him. When the matter is taken up for consideration, it is brought to my notice by the learned counsel for the petitioner that after this writ petition is field, the retirement benefits to which the petitioner is entitled to have been paid in the month of June, 2009. However, it is alleged that the interest on the delayed payments has not been paid. The learned counsel while relying upon a decision of the Supreme Court in Union of India and another v. M.S.Abdulla[1] submits that the respondents ought to have paid the interest at the rate of 12% per annum for the period of delay in payment of the retirement benefits. The petitioner is hereby granted liberty to make an appropriate representation claiming interest on the delayed payment on retiral benefits. If any such representation is made, the same shall be considered and appropriate orders be passed within eight weeks from the date of receipt of such application taking into consideration the Supreme Court case in Union of India. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. No costs. ______________ G. ROHINI,J Date: 12-08-2009 Note: issue C.C. by Monday. B/o KLP [1] 2006(6) SCC 455