IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS TUESDAY, THE 24TH MARCH 2009 / 3RD CHAITHRA 1931 WA.No. 1687 of 2005 ----------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN O.P.NO.19180/1998 DTD. 27/03/2005 .................... APPELLANT(S): PETITIONER ------------------------ E.K.JOSE, RETIRED EXTENSION OFFICER FOR PANCHAYATHS, ELANJIKKAL HOUSE, MALA - PALLIPPURAM, THRISSUR. BY ADV. MR.P.RAMAKRISHNAN. RESPONDENTS/ RESPONDENTS 1 AND 2 AND PETITIONER: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, LOCAL ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. DIRECTOR OF PANCHAYATHS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. R1 & R2 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. R. BINDU. THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 24/03/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS, JJ. ========================================= W.A.No.1687 of 2005 - D =============================== Dated this the 24th day of March, 2009. J U D G M E N T Balakrishnan Nair, J. The writ petitioner is the appellant. He retired from service as Village Extension Officer on 31.12.1989. The writ petition was filed seeking the following reliefs: “a. Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus compelling the respondents to settle the claims of petitioner for full pension, arrears of pay, proper fixation and other monetory claims. b. Direct that the delayed payments should be supported by interest at commercial rates”. 2. The learned Single Judge disposed of the writ petition directing the Assistant Director of Panchayaths to consider the claim of the petitioner and release the terminal benefits due to him. Contending that the learned Judge should have ordered to pay amounts due to him without relegating him to the departmental authorities, the writ appeal was filed. During the pendency of the writ appeal, pensionary benefits were released. Now, the learned counsel for the appellant submits that he is entitled to get interest for the delayed payments. Appellant submits that the only ground taken in the counter affidavit filed W.A.No.1687 of 2005 - D 2 in the writ petition justifying the delay is missing of his service book. Appellant points out that he is in noway responsible for that. Learned Government Pleader on the other hand submitted that the appellant has no prayer in the writ appeal for payment of interest. It is also submitted that no reply affidavit was filed by the appellant. 3. Having regard to the inordinate delay, we feel that the appellant should be paid interest for the DCRG for the delay in paying it after finalisation of the liability due from him. Accordingly, respondents are directed to pay 6% interest for the DCRG amount from the date of finalisation of the liability of the petitioner to the date of its release. The same shall be paid within four months from the date of production of a copy of this judgment. The writ appeal is disposed of as above. K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, JUDGE. M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS, JUDGE. bkn/-