IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 19TH OCTOBER 2009 / 27TH ASWINA 1931 WP(C).No. 6631 of 2007(M) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- T.V.JOSEPH, S/O. VARKEY, AGED 59, THEKKUMTHALAKKAL HOUSE, POOVAMTHURUTHU, KOTTAYAM. BY ADV. SRI.C.S.MANILAL RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, TAXES DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM. 2. THE COMMISSIONER, COMMERCIAL TAXES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, COMMERCIAL TAXES, KANJIRAPPALLY, KOTTAYAM. GOVT.PLEADER SRI.ANTONY MUKATH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 19/10/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC NO.6631/07 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS EXT.P1: TRUE COPY OF THE GRATUITY PAYMENT ORDER DT 11.6.03. EXT.P2: TRUE COPY OF THE GRATUITY PAYMENT ORDER DT 31.1.2004. EXT.P3: TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DT 6.10.2003 SUBMITTED BEFORE THEJOINT COMMISSIONER, COMMERCIAL TAXES, TRIVANDRUM EXT.P4: TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION IN 10TH NOVEMBER, 2003 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. Rp //TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ W.P.(C) NO. 6631 OF 2007 (M) ===================== Dated this the 19th day of October, 2009 J U D G M E N T Petitioner retired as a Sales Tax Officer as early as on 30/9/2002. This writ petition was filed complaining that his terminal benefits have not been released for no apparent reason. The prayer sought was to direct the respondents to discharge the DCRG and commuted value of pension and also issue the non liability certificate. Petitioner also prayed for interest on the amount for the belated payment. 2. It is now submitted by the counsel for the petitioner that non liability certificate dated 31/7/09 has been issued certifying that there is no liability from the petitioner outstanding to the Government. 3. Learned Government Pleader submits that there were certain proceedings and it was therefore that the delay has occurred. 4. In any case, having regard to the fact that under the Rules, if at all there was any liability which is to be fastened on the petitioner, that should have been done only within a period of WPC 6631/07 :2 : three years from the date of retirement. Even as of now, nobody has a case that any such proceedings have been initiated or any liability has been fixed. Now that the NLC has been issued and as according to the learned Government Pleader, benefits have been released, the only question that arises is whether the petitioner deserves to be compensated by awarding interest to the belated payment. 5. Having regard to the fact that the petitioner has retired as early as on 2002 and till date no liability has been fixed even within the three years, or beyond the three years, I see no justification for the delay on the part of the respondents in issuing the NLC till now. Therefore, I feel the petitioner is entitled to be awarded interest and the writ petition is disposed of directing that the respondents shall pay interest at the rate of 9% to the petitioner on the belated payment of the dues to the petitioner. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp