IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.W.P.No.544 of 2005 Date of Decision 27.11.2006 Ram Kishore Sharma ...Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and others ...Respondents Corum : HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE M.M.KUMAR HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE M.M.S.BEDI **** Present: Mr.R.K.Malik, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Harish Rathee, Sr. DAG, Haryana for respondent Nos.1 to 3. Mr.Hari Om Sharma, Advocate for respondent No.5. **** M.M.KUMAR,J. The prayer made by the petitioner in the instant petition is for issuance of direction to the respondents to release his pension and other retiral benefits along with interest at the market rate. The petitioner who was working as Head Master, attained the age of superannuation and retired as such on 31.12.1999. He filed the instant petition for claiming pension. However, during the pendency of the petition, his pension has been released on 19.9.2005 after a delay of about 5 years. It has been pointed out that after a period of one year, Employee’s Provident C.W.P.No.544 of 2005 [2] Fund was released on 30.3.2002. The only prayer that survives for consideration is whether the petitioner is entitled to claim interest on the delayed payment of pension and other retiral benefits including gratuity and Employees Provident Fund. The matter is no longer res-integra as the Full Bench of this Court in the case of R.S.Randhawa v. State of Punjab etc. 1997 (3) RSJ 318 has held that an employee is entitled to interest on the delayed payment of pensionary benefits. Another relief which has already been granted to the petitioner also needs to be highlighted. On 29.9.2005, an interlocutory order was passed showing that a sum of Rs.42,471/- was to be recovered from the DCPF on account of the delayed deposit by the management and the Division Bench has ordered that the petitioner cannot be subjected to the afore-mentioned recovery. The order dated 29.9.2005 read as under:- “Learned counsel for respondent no.5 has placed on the record challan dated 21.7.2005 which indicates that a sum of Rs.1,04,893 being the Management share of GPF has been deposited. In view of our orders dated 2.9.2005, Ms.Monga states that pension has been sanctioned and will be released shortly. The order sanctioning pension is also placed on the record. However, learned counsel for the petitioner has pointed out that at Sr.No.10 of the Sanction Order, it has been C.W.P.No.544 of 2005 [3] mentioned that a sum of Rs.42,471/- shall be recovered from the D.C.P.F. on account of delayed deposit by the Management. We see no justification for the recovery being made from the petitioner as the employee is, in no manner, responsible fro the delayed deposit. Ms.Monga, therefore, seeks a short adjournment to clarify the aforesaid issue.” In view of the above, this writ petition succeeds and the respondents are directed to pay him the interest at the rate of 9 per cent per annum from the date, the dues were payable till the date of its actual payment. If the interest on any item like Provident Fund has already been paid then the petitioner shall not be entitled for the same. It is also made clear that order dated 29.9.2005 stipulating that a sum of Rs.42471/- cannot be recovered from the petitioner, is also made absolute. The instant petition is disposed of as such. (M.M.KUMAR) JUDGE (M.M.S.BEDI) 27.11.2006 JUDGE sd