Civil Writ Petition No.20463 of 2008 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.20463 of 2008 Decided on : 12-08-2009 Ram Piari and another .... Petitioners VERSUS Haryana Vidut Parsaran Nigam, Panchkula & others .... Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SATISH KUMAR MITTAL. Present:- Mr. R.S. Dadwal, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr. Parveen Gupta, Advocate, for the respondents. SATISH KUMAR MITTAL, J (Oral). The petitioners have filed this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuing direction to the respondents to grant interest to the petitioners on the delayed payment of Rs.2,69,000/- released to the petitioners as arrears of family pension. In this case, earlier the petitioners had filed CWP No.13743 of 2003 for quashing the order dated 31.7.2002, whereby their claim for family pension was declined. Vide order dated 8.1.2004, the said petition was allowed by passing the following order:- “The petitioners are the parents of the deceased. Their claim to family pension has been declined Civil Writ Petition No.20463 of 2008 -2- on the ground that parents are not covered under the definition of family as per paragraph 4 (ii) of the Family Pension Scheme, 1964, which is applicable to the petitioners case. We find from a perusal of the judgment in Hukmi Devi Versus State of Haryana and others, 2003 (2) PLR 771 that this Court has struck down the definition of family in so far as it excludes the parents from within its ambit. The learned counsel for the respondents has however, argued that as the State of Haryana has not been impleaded as a party in the present writ petition, the same was not maintainable. We find no merit in this submission for the reason that the impugned action/inaction has been taken by the respondent-Nigam. We accordingly allow the writ petition and direct the respondents to pay family pension to the petitioners as per their entitlement within a period of three months from today. Dasti order.” By the aforesaid order, though the respondents were directed to pay the arrears of family pension to the petitioners within a period of three months from the date of order (i.e. 8.1.2004), but actually the arrears of family pension to the tune of Rs.2,69,000/- were paid to the petitioners on 3.12.2004. Since the respondents have released the arrears of family pension after a delay of about eleven months in violation of the Court's order, I am of the opinion that the petitioners are entitled to interest on the amount of family pension from 8.1.2004 to 2.12.2004 @ 12% per annum. Civil Writ Petition No.20463 of 2008 -3- Accordingly, this petition is allowed and the respondents are directed to pay interest to the petitioners on the delayed payment of Rs.2,69,000/- released to the petitioners as arrears of family pension @ 12% per annum from 8.1.2004 to 2.12.2004. 12th August, 2009. (SATISH KUMAR MITTAL) Monika JUDGE