AFp^ HIdH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH ; BILASPUR Writ Petition fS) No. 331 of2007 Petitioner Sitaram Bchara, S/o Shri, Gadarai, ayed about 63 yrs. R/o Basna, Tahsfl Basna, District Mah^aainund (C.G.) Versus Respondents 1. Statc of CUhattisgarh, fhrou^i Secretaiy to Govt Agriculture Departanent, D.K.S. Bhawau, Raipur (C.G.). Man^ing Director, C.O. State Kristai Vipnaa Board, Raipur C.G. The Dy. Director, C.G. Rajya Krishi Vipaaan Board, Mahasamund (C.G.) State of M.P. fhrough, Secretery, M.P. Krishi Vipnan Board, 26-Arera HUIs, Kisaa BIiawan, Bhopal (M.P.) Secretary, Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti Basna, Distt Mahasamund (C.G.) Man^ing Director, M.P.Rajya Krishi Vipnaa Board, 26 Arera Hilb Kisaa Bhawaa, Bhopal (M.P.) 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. WRFT pErmoN UNDER ARTICLE 225 OFTHE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA (SB; Hon'bte Shri Satish K. Agnihotri J.) SIuri Prakash Tiwari, Advocate for the petitioncr. Shri Yashwant Siagh Thakur, Dcputy Advocate General for the respondents No. 1 and 5. Shri Sanjay K. Agarwal, Advocate wifh Shri Sourabh Shaitaa, Advocate for tlie respondent No.6. OR D E R (Ordl (Passed on this 9th day ofSeptembcr, 2009) Heard. 1. Leamed counsel appcanng for thc petltioncr submite that the questfon with regard to grant of gratuily aad amount of unpaid - pension has been setUed, as fhc'same has been granted to the petitioner. Thus, ttus petition does not sumve on fhe question of - grant of gratuity as weU as fhe remaniiag pension. 2. Leacned counsel further submits that siace the gratuity aad uapaid pension is paid after a period of about 9 years, the ^a.'^^^^^TO;®^/-^.'f'-:"^.;'.-.i:/.,^.^iSc--s^s;6i^:iySif.-.,^ A petitioner is entitted to interest on the unpaid gratuity amount ia accordaace wifh law. Shri Sanjay K. Agarwal, learaed counsel with Shri Sotirabh Sharma, teamed counsel appelgrtag for the respoiident No.6 vcheiuently opposed fhe grant of iaterest to the petitioner, wifhout having aay justifiable reason or groimds. It has been held ia a catena of decisions fhat the pensioa is not a bounty. Aa eiaployee is entitled to pension aiid gratuily at fhe eariiest Siace the gratuily and luipaid pension has been wifhlield for a period ofabout 9 years, the petitioner is entitled to iaterest On the question ofappUcabiUly ofrate ofm.terest on the wifhheld gratuily amoiint aud uapaid pension, leamed coiinsel appearfng for the petitioner rety on a decision of this Court dated 7th September, 2009 in G.R.Sao v. State of CUiatttegarh & others, Writ Pttition No. 2333 of 2004, wherein this Court in paragraphs 6 aud 7 held as under: "6. On the questton of appUcabiUty of rate of interest on fhe witUheld gratuity amount, learued counsel appearing for the petitioner submlts that Section 7 offhe Payment of Gratulty Act, 1972 provides for determiaation of the amount of gratuity. Further, sub-section (3-A) of this Section 7 stipulates that if ttie amount of gratuity is not paid by the einployer wifhia time, the amount shatl carry simple interest i.e. 10% per nTiTiiitn specified as tiie rate of simple intecest vide Standing Order 874(E), dt 1.10.1987, but not exceediag the rate notified by the Central Govenunent Sxaa. time to tune for repayment of lon^-term deposits, as that Govemment may, by aotification specify. 7. For the reasons inentioned herein above, fhe petition is aUowed. The petitioner is entitled to fuU gratulty c\ amount wifh suaple mterest as inay have been notified by the Central Govermnent, froia the date it became duc. No order asto costs." In view of fhe above, it is held fhat fhe petitioner is cntitled to sanple iatereston fhe amount ofgratuity and unpaid pension, at fhe rate, as may have been uotified by thc Central Govenunent, fiom. the date it becaine duc. The iaterest calculated shaU be paid at the earliest, preferably witfain a period of four weeks fi-om the date of receipt ofa copy of ttds order. In view offhe foregoing, the writ petition stands disposed ofwith fhe above stated direction. No order asto costs. Sd/- Satish K. Agnifao&i Judge Thakur