-& .!»3h. <,CJ & Hon'ble Shri Oilip Raosaheb Deshmukh, J. Thakur Mohan Singh, Aged 71 y'ears, S/o Late Gw/ind Sinqh Thakur Retired Driver, Balod, &ev. Balod, Distt. DUR6 (M.P.) Ressondents: ot rry OT .S.Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) The Accounrant 3. The Commissioner, Raipu" Oivision, Raipur (M.P.) The CoUector, Durg (At.P.) The Block Development 4. icer, Ba! •p.) in jay Shrivastava, Counsel for the petitioner >rsh Verma, P.L. assisted Shri V.V.S.V ;! for respondents No.l, 3, 4 & 5. y- ORAL ORDER on 4th Jcmuary TTie following oral order of the Court was passed by fixed. befor; ssekir ing rne age OT Amri&ved the havinq served as driver under the State ing !n 20 years 10 days of service, retired on 31.01.1986 on superannuation. His pension viia.s not property i, the petitioner filed O.A.No.01/1999 stratiye TriBuna! (for short *the Tribunal') is to the bepartment to re-fix his pension taking into " ^ s-fSAW3s-r nccount 20 yeo.rs 10 days of seryice put in by the petitioner and to pary interest at the rat®of 18% per annum on ths difference. The 0..4. was contested by the Oepartment. The Tribunal having appreciated the riva! contentions and materials la'd before it, uphe!d 1+ie cbim of the petitioner for re-fixation of his pension. However, the Tribunal, on the gr-ound that there was a delay of 8 years on the part of th-s petitioner ,'n approaching the Court, directed tiiat on re-fixation of pension, the re-fixsd pension would be paid to the petitione" only prospective!y and he is not entitled to recover arrears of penslon for the past psriod. Being agg'rieved by that part of the direction, the petitioner has filed this writ petition under Articles 227 of the OT1 2. Having heard !earned counse! for the parties, we we of the considered opinion that the Tribunal is not justified in denying the The State which is bound by Article 14 postulates cannot be permitted to moke unlawfu! gain out of its own wrong. The Department having wrong!y computed pension payobls to the petitioner and having paid lesser psnsion thdn whct the petitioner was entitied to cannot now turn round and say tdat tliough it ma.de unlawfu! gain out of its own wrong it is not be obliged to pay arrears of penslon to the petitioner with regard to 'Hie past period. The impugned part of the o'-der of the.Tribuna! could not be sustained in terrns of !aw as we!l as in ter-ms of equity. 3. In the result, we allow the writ petition and direct that after re-fixation of the pension of the petitioner in terms of the judgment of the. Tribunal, the respondents shall pa)' the arrears of pension with regsrd t" ths past period also with interest @ 10% per nnnum till Sd/- Chief Justice Sd/- Dilip Raosaheb Deshmukh Judge