1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR. O R D E R S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION No.3764/1999. : : Ballabh Prasad Pandey Vs. State & Ors. : : Date of Order 2.7.2008 HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ Mr.Kunwar Bahadur for the petitioner. Ms.Parinitoo Jain, Dy.Govt.Counsel, for the State. This writ petition has been filed at the instance of a retired Government servant who has prayed for a direction to the respondents to issue no dues certificate and also the certificate of satisfactory service. The learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner retired from Government service on 30.4.1998 and at that time, no disciplinary proceedings were pending against him, therefore, there was no reason for the respondents to not to issue the certificate of satisfactory service and no dues certificate to the petitioner and withhold his retiral benefits. It has also been contended that the respondents attributed this to pending disciplinary action but 2 in fact they did not issue charge-sheet to him which shows that the matter was pending with the respondents only at the stage of contemplation of enquiry. The respondents, thereafter dropped that matter and granted pension and other retiral benefits, but delayed by three years. The learned counsel for the petitioner, therefore, prayed that respondents be now directed to pay to the petitioner interest @ 24% per annum on the amount of retiral benefits for the period of delay in terms of prayer of Clause No.4 of the writ petition. The learned counsel for the respondent opposed the statements and submitted that there was enquiry pending against the petitioner at the time of his retirement, therefore, the delay was attributed for the said reason. Subsequently, the Government decided to withdraw the charge-sheet, therefore, that the petitioner was not entitled to any interest. Right to receive pension and other retiral benefits on time is recognised by a Government servant retiring from service. Rule 89 of the Rajasthan Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1996 interalia provides that in exceptional circumstances, if the payment of retiral benefits has been 3 authorised after 60 days from the date when its payment became due, and it is clearly established that the delay in payment was not on account of failure on the part of the Government servant to comply with the procedure laid down in the Rules, interest @ 12% per annum for the period beyond 60 days after retiral benefits become due would be payable till the end of the month preceding the month in which the retiral benefits are authorized. Rate of interest was modified and enhanced to 12% per annum vide notification of the Government Circular dated 12.12.2001. Nothing has been brought on record that it was due to any fault on the part of the petitioner that the payments were delayed by three years. Even otherwise, the decision to hold enquiry and then to drop the same cannot be said to be a reason attributable to the petitioner. The petitioner would, therefore, certainly be entitled to interest for the period of delay beyond 60 days from the date of retirement. In the result, this writ petition is allowed and the respondents are directed to pay to the petitioner interest @ 9% per annum for the entire duration of the delay from the date of retirement for period prior to 12.6.2001 and 12% per annum interest for the period thereafter beyond 60 days 4 after retiral benefits became due till the end of the month preceding the month in which the retiral benefits are authorized. Compliance of the judgment be made within three months from the date copy of the judgment is produced before the respondents. (MOHAMMAD RAFIQ)J. A.Arora/- Item No.32.