- (1.) THE petitioner feels aggrieved by an order, whereunder his request for payment of interest on the amount of gratuity release where of was withheld on account of pendency of a disciplinary enquiry against him, even though the said enquiry terminated in his favour, was rejected.
(2.) HEARD the learned counsel for the parties. The petitioner reached the age of superannuation on 30th June, 1984 while holding the post of Assistant Commissioner (Civil Supplies ). The disciplinary proceedings, initiated against him during his service period, continued even after his retirement and, therefore, by an interim order, 10% deduction from his pension had been directed. However, the State Govern ment, vide order dated 7-10-1988 decided to exonerate the petitioner and drop the departmental proceedings, which were initiated against him. In view of exoneration from the charges levelled against him, the petitioner became entitled for the release of the amount of gratuity, which had become payable on the date of his retirement. Payment of gratuity had been unduly delayed To meet such contingency, the State Government had already taken a decision vide the order dated 30-11-1984, which is con tained in Annexure 6 to the writ petition, wherunder it was provided that on the delayed payment of the amount of gratuity upto a period of one year, the retired person was entitled to an interest of seven per cent per annum and if the payment was delayed even more than one year, then for the said period, the rate of interest payable would be 10 per cent per annum.
(3.) THE petitioner, on exoneration of the charges levelled against him, moved a representation seeking payment of interest at the rate of 10 per cent per annum for the period 1-7-1984 to 16-2-1989. THE aforesaid repre sentation was rejected by the impugned order, without assigning any reason. On the facts and circumstances of the case, it is apparent that in the presence of a decision, already taken by the State Government, there could be no justification, whatsoever, for depriving the petitioner of the amount of interest on the delayed payment of the amount of gratuity. The right, which had accrued in favour of the petitioner, entitling him for the payment of interest at the rate determined in the aforesaid order, could not be denied in the manner, as has been done by the respondents.;