IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.16465 of 2008 Md.Yahiya, Son of Late Md. Ismayil, Resident of Village – Bisunpur Gidha, P.S. – Maniyari, District – Muzaffarpur. ----- Petitioner Versus 1. Bihar State Electricity Board through its Chairman, Bihar, Patna. 2. The Secretary, Bihar State Electricity Board, Bihar, Patna. 3. The Director of Accounts, Bihar State Electricity Board, Bihar, Patna. 4. The Director of Finance, Bihar state Electricity Board, Bihar, Patna. 5. The General Manager-cum-Chief Engineer, Tirhut Electric Supply Area, Bihar State Electricity Board, Muzaffarpur. 6. The Deputy Director of Accounts, Tirhut Electric Supply Area, Muzaffarpur, Bihar. 7. The Deputy Director (Personnel), Tirhut Electric Supply Area, Muzaffarpur, Bihar. 8. The Account Officer, Electrical Circle, Electric Supply Division Muzaffarpur (West). 9. The Electrical Executive Engineer, Electric Supply Division Muzaffarpur (West). ------ Respondents ---------------------------------- 2 05.12.2011 Heard Sri Rajeev Ranjan, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Vinod Kumar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of all the Respondents/Bihar State Electricity Board. The present writ petition was filed with a prayer to direct the Respondents to pay his retiral dues. The petitioner had retired as ‘Typist’ on 31.05.2007 from Electric Supply Division, West Muzaffarpur. In this case a counter affidavit has been filed and it has been indicated that all the retiral dues of the petitioner have already been paid. Some amounts were paid prior to filing of the writ petition and some amounts have been paid during the pendency of the writ petition. No rejoinder to the counter affidavit has been filed by the petitioner. However, it was submitted by Sri Rajeev Ranjan that 2 from the fact stated in the counter affidavit it is evident some amounts particularly amount of gratuity was paid vide cheque dated 05.02.2009 whereas the petitioner retired in the year 2007 i.e. on 31.05.2007. Accordingly, it was submitted that the petitioner was entitled to claim interest on the said amount. Learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn my attention to Annexure -1 to the writ petition and it was submitted that amount of gratuity i.e. Rs. 3,02,049/- was sanctioned vide Annexure -1 to the writ petition and counter affidavit makes it clear that same amount i.e. Rs. 3,02,049/- was paid vide cheque no. 225802 dated 05.02.2009. It was submitted that this fact makes it clear that gratuity amount which was sanctioned in the year 2007 was paid in the year 2009 without adding any interest on delayed payment. In view of the submission made by learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Annexure – 1 and admission of Respondent in its counter affidavit it is evident that gratuity amount was paid in the year 2009 without any interest for which the petitioner was entitled. Accordingly, the Respondents are directed to pay interest at the rate of 05% on the amount of gratuity which should be calculated from the date of sanction i.e. 31.07.2007 till the date of issuance of cheque i.e. 05.02.2009. The amount of interest must be paid to the petitioner within eight weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. 3 With above observation and direction the writ petition stands disposed of. Praful ( Rakesh Kumar, J.)