COCP No.2106 of 2011 (O & M) ::1:: IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH COCP No.2106 of 2011 (O & M) Date of decision: 07.11.2011 Mrs. Sheela Bhakar .... Petitioner Versus Surina Rajan and another. ....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL Present: Mr.Surender Lamba, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr.Anoop Sharma, AA.G., Haryana. **** AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. : (Oral) The petitioner in the present petition seeks initiation of action against the respondents for the wilful and intentional disobedience of order dated 09.11.2010 (Annexure P-2) passed by this Court in CWP No. 3764 of 2010. 2. According to the learned counsel, the statement was made in the aforesaid CWP on behalf of the respondents that the proceedings which were initiated against the petitioner would be finalized shortly and the benefits shall be released in the eventuality of petitioner being found entitled to the same. 3. This Court while disposing of the petition as infructuous, had granted liberty to the petitioner to approach this Court in the eventuality of any surviving grievance including grant of interest on the withheld payment to him. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the said COCP No.2106 of 2011 (O & M) ::2:: order has not been complied with and, therefore, the petitioner has been forced to approach this Court by way of present petition. 5. Upon notice having been issued, a short reply has been filed on behalf of the respondents in Court today. Same is taken on record and a copy thereof has been given to learned counsel for the petitioner. 6. Learned State counsel has also produced copies of pension payment orders for Rs.4,91,309/- on account of death-cum- retirement gratuity, Rs.6,14,321/- on account of commuted value of pension and Rs.13,293/- on account of revision of pension. It has been stated in the reply that the delay occurred in settling the claim of the petitioner due to inquiry pending against him and was unintentional. 7. Learned counsel for the petitioner, however, states that since there has been delay on the part of the respondents in releasing the amount, the petitioner is entitled to all the retiral benefits along with interest. This fact is, however, disputed by the learned counsel for the State. 8. In view of the above, while disposing of present petition, liberty is granted to the petitioner to file a detailed representation claiming interest on the delayed payment and any other relief to which, according to the petitioner, he is entitled to receive. If the said representation is filed, the same shall be decided expeditiously by the respondents. (AJAY KUMAR MITTAL) JUDGE November 07, 2011 sukhpreet COCP No.2106 of 2011 (O & M) ::3::