IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.7408 of 2011 Dhup Nath Singh, Son of Late Deopujan Rai, resident of Village- Kumhaila, P.S. Isuapur, District-Saran -------------- Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Agriculture, Govt. of Bihar,Patna 2. The Director, Department of Agriculture, Govt. of Bihar,Patna 3. The Agriculture Production Commissioner, Bihar,Patna 4. The Finance Commissioner, Govt. of Bihar,Patna 5. The Deputy Secretary, Finance ( Personal ) claim Settlement Cell, Pant Bhawan, Baily Road,Patna 6. The Accountant General ( A & E),Bihar, Bir Chand Patel Path,Patna 7. The Joint Director, Agriculutre , Saran Division, Chapra 8. The District Agriculture Officer, Saran at Chapra 9. The District Magistrate, Saran at Chapra 10. The Sub Divisional Agriculture Officer, Marhaurah, District Saran at Chapra --------------------------------- Respondents. ----------- 02 27-04-2011 Heard Sri Suresh Prasad Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Shakti Suman Kumar, learned A.C. to Standing Counsel no.22 appearing on behalf of Respondent nos.1 to 5 and 7 to 10. None appeared on behalf of Respondent no.6/ Accountant General, Bihar, Patna. The petitioner, who retired with effect from 30.11.2004 as Agriculture Inspector from the Sub Divisional Agriculture Office, Marhaurah (Saran), had earlier approached this Court Vide C.W.J.C.No. 11237 of 2005 for payment of his retiral dues. During the pendency of the writ petition, it was submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that retiral dues of the petitioner had been cleared. However, on delayed payment, no interest was paid. Subsequently, the writ petition i.e. C.W.J.C.No.11237 of 2005 was referred to the Lok Adalat held at Patna High Court. 2 Before Lok Adalat, an undertaking was given on behalf of the State for making payment of statutory interest, if the same had not been paid on delayed payment. Accordingly, a consent award was prepared on 1.5.2010. A copy of the award has been enclosed as Annexure-6 to the present writ petition. It would be appropriate to quote the award, which is as follows: “The dispute between the parties having been referred for determination to the Lok Adalat and the parties having compromised/settled the case/matter, the following award is passed in terms of the settlement: Parties to the dispute are present. During the pendency of the writ application, some of the issues with regard to payment of retiral dues etc. have been resolved. The only matter left was claim of the petitioner with regard to interest for delayed payment. It is hereby recorded that parties therefore have reached an understanding for resolution of the dispute themselves to that extent. Learned counsel for the State states that the State will pay statutory interest, if not already paid on the delayed payment, which the petitioner is entitled to within eight weeks. With this, the dispute stands resolved and allowed to rest. The parties are informed that the court fee, if any, paid by any of them shall be refunded.” Since the dispute was amicably settled, there is no reason for the Respondents to sit tight over the matter. Now only requirement is to execute the award. As per award, the payment was to be made within eight weeks. It was submitted by learned 3 counsel for the petitioner that despite preparation of award and after expiry of period fixed by the Lok Adalat, Respondent Authorities have not taken any heed for payment of interest on delayed payment. Accordingly, Respondents are directed to make payment of interest amount on delayed payment in terms of award dated 01.05.2010 within a period of one month from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. The writ petition stands allowed. NKS/- ( Rakesh Kumar,J.)