IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA LPA No.88 of 2009 Decided on : December 21, 2009 State of H.P. and others …Appellants. Versus Dr. P.C. Gupta …Respondent. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Surjit Singh, Judge. The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Surinder Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioners : Mr. R.K. Sharma, Sr. Additional Advocate General. For the Respondent : Mr. V.D. Khidta, Advocate. Surjit Singh, J (Oral) Heard and gone through the record. 2. From the record, we find that the State- appellants are liable for causing delay in acceptance of request of the respondent for premature retirement, which caused delay in the release of pensionary benefits, for the period from the date of submission of papers for premature retirement upto the date of acceptance of the request for such retirement. 3. Respondent applied for premature retirement on 31st December, 2004 and gave three months notice. That means he was to be retired on and with effect from 1st April, 2005. However, his request was acceded to vide order dated 12th March, 2008, Annexure P-20. Thereafter, the Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? …2… respondent was requested by the Department several times to attend the Office and fill in the papers, required to be submitted alongwith the pension case, to the Accountant General. He did not pay any heed to those requests. Written requests were made in September and November, 2008. He responded to the requests and submitted documents/papers only on 27th November, 2008. 4. Even according to the Pension Rules, completion of pension sanctioning process and release of gratuity money takes about six months. The concerned authorities completed the process within six months of the respondent’s submitting documents and papers. Order for release of gratuity and payment of pension had been issued before 23rd April, 2009, the date of the order of the learned Single Judge, by which the writ petition was finally disposed of. 5. In view of what we have noticed hereinabove, the respondent, in our considered view, is not entitled to any interest on the delayed payment of gratuity and pension, subsequent to the date of the acceptance of his request for premature retirement, i.e. 12th March, 2008. He, however, is entitled to interest on the delayed payment of gratuity from 1st April, 2005, the date from which he was retired to the date of the issuance of the order of his retirement, i.e. 12th March, 2008, at the rate at which the interest is payable on General Provident Fund …3… accumulations, per Rule 62 of the Pension Rules. He is also entitled to equitable interest on the arrears of pension, for the period from 1st April, 2005 to 12th March, 2008, because, as already noticed, the appellants-State delayed acceptance of the request of the respondent for premature retirement. Interest on the arrears of pension for the aforesaid period is also directed to be paid at the rate of 8% per annum. On the amount representing the leave encashment also interest is ordered to be paid at the rate of 8% per annum from 1st April, 2005 to 12th March, 2008. Of course, interest on the entire amount of General Provident Fund accumulation is payable upto the date of its actual payment to the respondent, because the money remained with the Government and it made use of it. With the aforesaid modification in the order of the learned Single Judge, the appeal is finally disposed of. Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. ( Surjit Singh ), J December 21, 2009(sd) ( Surinder Singh ), J