1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR. O R D E R S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION No.868/2004. : : Ganpat Lal Chouhan Vs. Director, Animal Husbandry & Ors. : : Date of Order 23.9.2008 HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ None present for the petitioner. Mr.Anukur Rastogi, Addl.Govt. Counsel for the State. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner aggrieved by the action of the respondents in withholding the amount of Rs.46,109/- of pension, gratuity and the commutation. The petitioner has contended that he submitted an application for voluntary retirement on 5.8.2000 seeking voluntary retirement w.e.f. 30.11.2000. The Director, Animal Husbandry Department vide his order dated 27.9.2003 accepted the application directing that the petitioner would retire w.e.f. 30.11.2000 and accordingly the petitioner was relived by relinquishing the charge of the post. He was issued no-due certificate on that day, copy of which is on record, but the respondents did not finalize his pension case for quite some time. The petitioner then made 2 representation, it was after four months that provisional pension was granted to the petitioner vide PPO dated 6.3.2001 and the payment of his gratuity and other retiral dues were released but the amount of Rs.46,109/- was illegally withheld. The petitioner was retired on the basic pay of Rs.8100/-. The respondents in reply to the writ petition, have merely stated that their action is justified in accordance with the rules, but have not stated the reasons why the aforesaid amount was withheld and why the pension case of the petitioner was not finalised, but certain documents are enclosed with the reply by inadvertence disclose the true story. The letter of the Additional Director dated 7.8.2004 which is enclosed therewith states that the amount of the petitioner, which was withheld, has since been released because his pay fixation made on 1.4.1998 was correct and it was done after due sanction of the Finance Department. The documents also include a letter dated 19.5.2004 written by the Assistant Account Officer to the Assistant Director, Animal Husbandry, Tonk conveying that the pay fixation of the petitioner at Rs.7500/- on 1.4.1998 on the scale of Rs.6500- 10500/- was correctly made in accordance with rules. Surprisingly, the letter of the Additional Director states that 3 the parawise comments of the petition for filing reply to the writ petition should corroborate the factum about release of withheld amount and correct pay fixation, but this fact has not been incorporated in the reply. It is indeed that said commentary on the working of the respondents-department in which the retired employee has been unnecessarily forced to approach the Court when the respondents themselves on scrutiny found that pay fixation was correctly made and the aforesaid amount was wrongly withheld. There was no valid reason for delaying release the payment of the retiral dues. In the result, this writ petition is allowed. The respondents are directed to release the aforesaid withheld amount, if not already released, forthwith. The petitioner is entitled for interest @ 12% per annum as per Rule 89 of the Rajasthan Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1996 for the period of delay that actually occurred in making payment of the retiral dues to the petitioner excluding the period of 60 days from the date of his retirement i.e. 30.11.2000. 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/- 4