WP(C) 6695/2010 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE B. K. SHARMA Heard Mr. R. Islam, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Ms. R. Chakraborty, learned State Counsel. I have also heard Mr. G. Baishya, learned C GC appearing for the Accountant General, Assam. The petitioner, who has since retired from service on attaining the age of superannuation on 30.6.2009, has filed this writ petition praying for monthly pension. The writ petition was entertained by order dated 20.12.2010 directing the learned State Counsel to obtain instruction. However, no such instruction ha ving been furnished. Notice was issued on 22.12.2010 and thereafter the matter w as adjourned on 7.2.2011, 28.2.2011 and 14.3.2011 on the request of the learned State Counsel. However, no counter affidavit has been filed by the State Respond ents. In the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the Accountant General, it has been stated that the pension papers of the petitioner was returned to the State respondents for re-submission meeting the points raised by the office of the Ac countant General. The official respondents have not shown any response to the sa id request of the AG. In the affidavit, it has further been stated that the AG Office has been requesting the Department to furnish the necessary intimation but till the date of filling the affidavit on 31.3.2011, the State respondents have not done anyt hing. Ms. R. Chakraborty, learned State Counsel has produced the letter dated 11.3.2011, by which the Additional Chief Engineer (PHE) has furnished written i nstruction. In the written instruction, it has been stated that the petitioner w hile in service, had taken some loan. It has also been stated that there was mis utilisation of sanctioned house building advance and the same has come to the no tice of the authorities only after the retirement of the petitioner. Further, it has also been stated that no departmental proceeding has been proposed. As rega rds return of the pension papers by the Office of the A.G., same has been admitt ed with the statement that the petitioner has been paid the other retirement ben efits except pension. In the writ petition, the petitioner has stated about payment of provisi onal pension which has been stopped from July, 2010. As per the provisions of th e Pension Rules and instructions furnished thereunder, pension cases are require d to be finalised within a reasonable time. Once an employee retires from servic e on attaining the age of superannuation, it is the bounden duty of the Govt. t o provide him with the financial settlement/dues including monthly pension at th e earliest opportunity and the matter cannot be kept pending indefinitely requir ing the retired employee to approach this Court by filling writ petition. If any action is required to be taken in respect of the services rendered by the perso n concerned, such action must follow immediately and cannot be the ground to wit hhold pension. In view of the above, the writ petition is disposed of directing the res pondents to pay the admissible pension to the petitioner, as expeditiously as po ssible, but at any rate not latter then 31.5.2011. Whatever formalities are requ ired to be observed in this regard, the State respondents shall carry out the sa me with due intimation to the Office of the AG. In case of failure to provide mo nthly pension of the petitioner within the aforesaid stipulated period of time, both arrear and current, the erring officials shall be responsible for payment o f interest. Till the petitioner is provided with monthly pension, he may be allowed to occupy the official quarter that was allotted to him With the above directions and observations, the writ petition stands dis posed of, without however, any order as to costs.