IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.W.P No.4528 of 2011 Date of Decision:12.10.2011 Vijay Kumar .... Petitioner Versus Chaudhary Charan Singh Haryana Agriculture University, Hisar and another .... Respondents CORAM: Hon'ble Ms. Justice Nirmaljit Kaur Present: Mr. Anurag Jain, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Vivek Rattan, Advocate for the respondents. **** 1.Whether Reporters of Local Newspapers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2.To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3.Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? NIRMALJIT KAUR, J. (Oral) The present petition has been filed under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to release all statutory retiral benefits i.e. General Provident Fund, Commuted Value of pension, gratuity and revised dearness allowance of the petitioner along with interest @ 18% per annum to be paid from the date of retirement i.e. 30.11.2010 till realization. The respondents have filed a short reply by way of affidavit of Dr. S.S. Dahiya, Registrar, Chaudhary Charan Singh, Haryana Agricultural Unversity, Hisar stating therein that the retiral benefits stand paid to the petitioner. The detail thereof has been mentioned in para 1 of the said reply. Learned counsel for the petitioner, however, states that although the retiral benefits stand paid but no interest has been paid on the delayed payment. C.W.P No.4528 of 2011 -2- In view of the above, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of the present writ petition as having been rendered infructuous qua the payment of retiral benefits. However, the respondents are directed to consider the claim of the petitioner qua interest towards delayed payment against retiral benefits as per notification F.D. Hr. O.M. No.1/2(152) 01-2 FR II dt. 20.2.2002 within 2 weeks from the date of receipt of this order. In case, the petitioner is entitled for the same, the said benefits shall be released immediately thereafter. However, it goes without saying that in case the petitioner is found not entitled, the respondents shall pass a speaking order. 12.10.2011 ( NIRMALJIT KAUR ) rajeev JUDGE