IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN THURSDAY, THE 11TH JUNE 2009 / 21ST JYAISHTA 1931 WP(C).No. 10564 of 2009(M) ------------------------------------ PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- V.ABDUL RAZAK,S/O.KUNHALI,AGED 57 YEARS, STORE SUPERINTENDENT (RETIRED)DISTRICT MEDICAL STORE, TIRUR, RESIDING AT VATTAPARAMBIL HOUSE, MANKADA, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT-679324. BY ADV. SRI.K.P.SUDHEER SRI.V.C.MADHAVANKUTTY RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. THE DISTRICT OF HEALTH SERVICES, DIRECTORATE OF HEALTH SERVICES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 2. THE ACCOUNTANT GENERAL,OFFICE OF THE ACCOUNTANT GENERAL (A & E)THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE DISTRICT MEDICAL OFFICER OF HEALTH, DISTRICT MEDICAL OFFICE, MANJERI, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT 4. THE STORE SUPERINTENDENT,DISTRICT MEDICAL STORE, TIRUR. 5. THE SUB TREASURY OFFICER, MAKKARAPARAMBA MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. GOVT. PLEADER ADV. ANU SIVARAMAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11/06/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: tga P.N.RAVINDRAN, J. ------------------------------------- W.P.(C)No.10564 of 2009 -------------------------------------- Dated 11th June, 2009 JUDGMENT Heard Sri.K.P.Sudheer, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Smt.Anu Sivaraman, the learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents. 2. The petitioner retired from service on 30.4.2007. This writ petition was filed aggrieved by the delay in disbursement of DCRG. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the DCRG was disbursed to the petitioner on 10.6.2009. The learned counsel however submitted that payment of DCRG was withheld illegally and therefore the petitioner is entitled to be compensated by award of interest. He relied on the decision of the Apex Court in Dua v. State of Haryana (2008(3) KLT 58 (SC)). Per contra the learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents submits that proceedings had been initiated against the petitioner after retirement to fix liability and that the proceedings were finalised only on 13.5.2009 when Ext.P11 order was issued. 3. I have considered the submissions made at the Bar by the learned counsel appearing on either side. The pleadings in the case on hand disclose that proceedings for fixation of liability was WP(C).No.10564/2009 2 pending against the petitioner and that it came to an end only on 13.5.2009. Payment of DCRG was made immediately thereafter. In such circumstances, it would not be just and proper for this Court to hold that there was culpable delay on the part of the respondents in disbursing the DCRG. I am therefore persuaded to agree with the learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents that no grounds have been made out warranting award of interest. In view of the fact that payment of DCRG has already been made, I close this writ petition as infructuous. The claim for payment of interest is declined. P.N.RAVINDRAN Judge TKS