KISHAN LAL MATHUR Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition was filed by the petitioner with the prayer that respondents be directed to immediately release all his retrial benefits and salary for the suspension period with interest @ 18% per annum.

(2.) THE petitioner was retired from service of the respondents on 30. 6. 1997. He thereafter made number of representations to the respondents for grant of retrial benefits. THE respondents, however, made payment of his retiral dues during the pendency of the writ petition. THE petitioner has filed an additional affidavit with which he has placed on record a Chart giving the dates on which the payments were actually made to him. THEre are in all 9 heads in the said chart in which it has been mentioned that on which dates the payment was made but most of the payments were made to the petitioner in the year 2003 and 2004.

(3.) EARLIER sub-rule (1) of the Rules of 1989 provided for payment of interest @ 12% per annum but substituted rule referred to above, provided for interest @ 9% per annum. In my considered view, when the respondents have not come out with any explanation as to why payment of retrial/terminal benefits of the petitioner was not made in time and they have also not taken a stand that delay in making such payment was caused on account of any fault on the part of the petitioner, the petitioner certainly becomes entitled to payment of interest. When delay has been caused on the account of fault of the respondents alone and the same cannot in any manner be attributed to the petitioner, the respondents cannot escape from their liability to make payment of interest as prescribed by rule 89 (1) (supra ).