IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN THURSDAY, THE 26TH MARCH 2009 / 5TH CHAITHRA 1931 OP.No. 11885 of 2002(M) ----------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, TRIVANDRUM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. SMITHA SUKUMAR. RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. KERALA LOK AYUKTA, LEGISLATIVE COMPLEX, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. K.K.VALSALA, THRIVENI,HOUSE NO.755, CAVALCADE, CHEMMRUTHY, PARIPPALLY, TRIVANDRUM DISTRICT. 3. HEADMASTER, GOVT. HIGHER SECONDARY VOCATIONAL SCHOOL, VAKKOM, TRIVANDRUM. ADV. SRI.S.D.ASOKAN FOR R2 SRI.R.SREERAJ FOR R2 SRI.NIDHI BALACHANDRAN FOR R2 SRI.ANIL R. NAIR FOR R2 THIS ORIGINAL PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 26/03/2009, THE COURT, ON THE SAME DAY, DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: O.P.NO. 11885/2002. ------------------------------------------------------------------ EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF COMPLAINT DT. 17-4-2001. EXT.P2 STATEMENT OF FACTS DT. 5-6-2001. EXT.P3 DO. DT. 13-6-2001. EXT.P4 REPLICATION DT. 11-7-2001. EXT.P5 ORDER DT. 11-7-2001. EXT.P6 ORDER DT. 6-8-2001. EXT.P7 & P8 COPIES OF STATEMENT OF FACTS. EXT.P9 ORDER DT. 12-12-2001. [TRUE COPY] P.S TO JUDGE. S. Siri Jagan, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= O.P. No. 11885 of 2002 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this, the 26th March, 2009. J U D G M E N T The petitioner in this original petition is the Deputy Director of Education, Trivandrum. He is challenging Ext. P9 order of the Kerala Lok Ayukta, whereby the Lok Ayukta directed the petitioner to pay to the 2nd respondent herein interest on delayed payment of DCRG due to the 2nd respondent at the rate of 10% p.a. The contention of the petitioner is that the delay was on account of the conduct of the 2nd respondent herself. The 2nd respondent was the Headmistress of a school. She retired from service on 31-5-1997. As per the instructions issued by the Government, pension papers of a person who is to retire is to be forwarded at least one year prior to the date of retirement. But, in this case, the 2nd respondent forwarded her pension papers only on 23-4-1997, barely one month prior to her date of retirement. Apart from that, while the 2nd respondent was in service, certain audit objections were forwarded to her for her comments which she did not reply to. The audit objections were cleared subsequent to the retirement of the 2nd respondent on the basis of the report obtained from her successor in office on 4-8-1997. The petitioner would therefore submit that in so far as the delay was on account of the conduct of the 2nd respondent herself, she is not entitled to any interest on the delayed payment of DCRG. 2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. None appears for the 2nd respondent. 3. Assuming that everything stated by the petitioner is true and correct, admittedly, the DCRG due to the 2nd respondent was disbursed only after she filed the complaint before the Lok Ayukta. Part of the DCRG was paid on 30-11-2001 and the balance on 30-1- 2002. Therefore, even if part of the delay was on account of the conduct of the 2nd respondent, there was several years of delay in O.P. No. 11885/2002 -: 2 :- disbursing the DCRG. The Government themselves have issued circulars to the effect that for delayed payment of retirement benefits, interest is payable. Therefore, I cannot now accept the contention of the petitioner that no interest at all is due. Some interest is certainly due to the 2nd respondent . Therefore, having taken into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, I direct that 10% interest rate shall be reduced to 6%. Accordingly, the 2nd respondent shall be paid interest at the rate of 6% p.a. on her DCRG from 1-1-1998 to 30-11-2001 and 30-1-2002 respectively for the amounts paid belatedly. Orders in this regard shall be passed and the amount disbursed to the 2nd as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Sd/- S. Siri Jagan, Judge. Tds/