DIWAN SIRKECK Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER was appointed as Medical Officer (HPHS -1) in the Health and Family Welfare Department in the year 1974. He was charge -sheeted on 28.3.2002. He retired after attaining the age of superannuation on 31.3.2002. He received the copy of charge -sheet on 8.7.2002. He filed reply to the same on 15.7.2002. The Inquiry Officer exonerated the petitioner on 12.10.2004. However, the respondents instituted de novo inquiry against the petitioner on the same and similar charges on 9.3.2005. This decision of the respondents was challenged by the petitioner by filing O.A. No. 661/2005. The same was allowed by the erstwhile Himachal Pradesh Administrative Tribunal on 2.12.2005. The learned Tribunal directed the respondents to release forthwith all the retiral/pensionary benefits to the petitioner within a period of one month from the date of passing of the order. However, the fact of the matter is that petitioner was released gratuity on 4.3.2006, leave encashment on 22.3.2006, commuted valuation of pension on 6.3.2006 and additional commuted valuation of pension on 7.7.2006.

(2.) MR . Ashwani K. Sharma has strenuously argued that respondents were liable to pay interest @9% per annum to the petitioner on the delayed payments of the retiral benefits, including, gratuity and leave encashment.

(3.) I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have perused the pleadings carefully.