1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR. O R D E R S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION No.524/2006. : : Kanhaiya Lal Choudhary Vs. Director of Pension & Ors. : : Date of Order 18.3.2009 HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ Mr. H.C.Ganeshia with Ms.Chitra Goyal and Mr. M.L.Sharma for the petitioner. Mr. Pradeep Kalyania, Addl.Govt.Counsel for the State. Heard learned counsel for the parties 2. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner aggrieved by non-payment of commutation of pension, amount of GPF and CPF and deduction of House Rent Allowance vide order dated 7.8.1995 and non-grant of benefits of selection scale on completion of 9, 18 & 27 years of service in terms of Government Circular dated 25.1.1992. 3. Shri H.C.Ganeshia, learned counsel for the petitioner has cited judgment of this Court in earlier writ petition filed by him namely; SB Civil Writ Petition No.2332/1993 : Kanhaiya Lal Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. 2 decided on 6.8.1993 and submitted that this Court while partly allowing the said writ petition directed the respondents to consider claim of the petitioner for grant of benefit of circular dated 25.1.1992 and also to determine his pension within a period of four months. The pension case of the petitioner was enormously delayed because the respondents while forwarding his pension case to the Directorate of Pension did not even send his service book. Reference in this connection was made to letter of Assistant Engineer Mechanic (Sub Division), Rawatbhata dated 4.8.2000 addressed to Director of Pension Department, Jaipur. It was argued that even though the petitioner retired from service on 31.12.1992, but his service book was forwarded to Directorate of Pension belatedly in the year 2000. Learned counsel submitted that respondents had already deducted house rent allowance from his salary, but the respondents illegally again deducted Rs.13,900/- from his GPF amount on that head by order dated 7.4.1995 and CPF amount was also not paid. The petitioner was very much in service when circular of the Government dated 25.1.1992 was issued and, therefore, if he had taken the benefit of selection scale in old scheme his case was still liable to be considered in terms of Circular dated 25.1.1992 for grant of benefits thereunder. 3 Despite specific direction of this Court in judgment dated 6.8.1993 the respondents have not granted such benefits. 4. Shri Pradeep Kalwania, learned Additional Government Counsel opposed the writ petition and submitted that delay in finalization of pension case took place because of pendency of litigation. In regard to deduction, it was submitted that such amount was withheld for a short period but later on, it was released and the petitioner has also been paid CPF & GPF and his case for refund of pension has already been sent to Pension Department. He was already granted selection scale on completion of 15 years of service by order dated 14.5.1991 in terms of order of Finance Department dated 12.12.1989 his case could not be, therefore, considered in terms of Circular dated 25.1.1992. 5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material on record, I find that there was certainly much delay caused in finalization of pension case of the petitioner which is why the respondents did not release his commutation of pension. The respondents have although submitted that the payment of GPF and CPF was released and deducted amount was refunded, but then there was 4 delay in making payment of all these dues. Even if the petitioner was already been granted selection scale on completion of 15 years of service, since he was in service at the time of promulgation of the Circular dated 25.1.1992, which provided for benefit of selection scale on completion of 9, 18 & 27 years of service, his case ought to have been considered for grant of selection scale. This Court specifically directed the respondents to consider his case under that circular for grant of benefit of selection scale. The respondents have not at all clarified as to how and in what manner the case of the petitioner was considered and he was not eligible for such benefit. Mere grant of selection scale in terms of selection scale of 15 years would not be impediment in case of the petitioner if it is shown that he has not received promotion at every interval of nine years. In the result, this writ petition is disposed of and the respondents are directed to pay to the petitioner interest @ 9% per annum in terms of Rule 89 of Rajasthan Civil Service (Pension) Rules for delay in payment of all the dues of Pension, GPF, CPF and amount which was illegally deducted towards HRA. The respondents are also directed to make a fresh consideration to grant of selection scale in terms of Circular dated 25.1.1992 and if eventually such 5 benefits are granted the petitioner shall also be granted such benefits together with interest @ 9% per annum. Compliance of the judgment be made within three months from the date its copy is produced before the respondents. (MOHAMMAD RAFIQ)J. A.Arora/- Item No.25.