CWP(T) No. 4289 of 2008 (OA No. 703 of 1997) 4.8.2009 Present:- Mr. Ranjan Sharma, counsel for the petitioners. Mr. R.P.Singh, Asstt. A.G. for the respondents. The learned counsel for the petitioner has confined his relief only to prayer made in para 7 (i) of the petition. The learned counsel for the petitioner has not pressed the remaining reliefs as prayed in the petition. The facts relevant to relief No. 7(i) are that petitioner pre- maturely retired on 31.12.1992 as Inspector Panchayati Raj. He submitted his pension papers vide Annexure A-3 dated 18.2.1993 to District Panchayat Officer, Chamba. The Director, Panchayati Raj sent the papers to Accountant General, Himachal Pradesh and papers were returned to Government on 12.1.1994 with some objections . The main objection was with respect to verification of the service particulars of the petitioner. The papers after verification were sent by the Director, Panchayati Raj to the Accountant General, Himachal Pradesh on 29.6.1995, the Director, took about 1 ½ years for sending the papers to Accountant General, Himachal Pradesh even though the papers were returned by the Accountant General, Himachal Pradesh on 12.1.1994. The pension and retiral gratuity was sanctioned by the Accountant General’s office on 3.8.1995. The grievance of the petitioner is that as per Rule 68 of the CCS Pension Rules, instruction No.2 the petitioner is entitled to interest on delayed payment of pension and gratuity at rate applicable to G.P.F. deposits. It has been submitted that after submission of the papers on 18.2.1993 by the petitioner, he was not required to do anything and everything was to be done by the Government for completion and verification of the service particulars of the petitioner. In support of this submission, the learned counsel for the petitioner has taken assistance from Rule 59 of the aforesaid Rules. - 2 - It has been submitted on behalf of the respondent that some delay was caused for clarifying the service particulars of the petitioner. The fact remains that the petitioner had submitted his papers on 18.2.1993 and the pension and gratuity should have been released to him within reasonable time. The pension and gratuity was released to petitioner after it was sanctioned on 3.8.1995. Therefore, there is apparently delay in releasing the pension and gratuity to the petitioner. In these circumstances, the petitioner is entitled to interest as provided in Rule 68 of the CCS Pension Rules on pension and gratuity. The respondent No.1 is directed to pay interest to petitioner on pension and retirement gratuity w.e.f. 1st July, 1993 to 3.8.1995 at the rate applicable to G.P.F. deposits. The petition stands disposed of on above terms. August 4, 2009. ( Kuldip Singh ) (GR) Judge.