(1.) With the consent of parties, finally heard.
(2.) The singular prayer of petitioner is to direct the respondents to pay 12% interest on arrears of family pension.
(3.) Shri Anirudh Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the mother of petitioner, a Govt. employee, died on 13/10/2010. The petitioner, a dependent of Govt. servant, promptly fulfilled the formalities and prayed for grant of family pension. The request of petition went in vain. Aggrieved, petitioner filed WP No. 14624/2015 which was disposed of on 2/9/2015 by directing the respondents to consider and decide the representation of petitioner by passing a speaking order. Since this order was not complied with, the petitioner filed contempt petition No. 101 of 2016 which was dismissed as having rendered infructuous because by that time, respondent passed the order dtd. 17/3/2016 whereby representation of petitioner for grant of family pension was rejected. The petitioner then filed WP No. 7516/2017 assailing the rejection order dtd. 17/3/2016 which was decided on 30/11/2018. This Court after considering the Pension Rules opined that petitioner's claim for family pension deserves to be considered in the light of Rule 47(6) of M.P. Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1976. Since this order was also not complied with, petitioner filed another contempt petition No. 1154/2019. After receiving notices of this case also, the pension payment order was not issued. The Court then by order dtd. 10/12/2020 directed the personal presence of Dy. Commissioner, Tribal Welfare Development Department before the Court. Thereafter respondents issued pension payment order (PPO) and therefore, contempt petition was dismissed. In this order dtd. 24/6/2021, it was made clear that if petitioner has any other grievance, she shall be at liberty to raise the grievance before appropriate forum. Since family pension was belatedly paid by respondents, the present petition is filed to pay interest on delayed payment on pension.