- (1.) The affidavit of service filed be kept with the records.
(2.) The Short facts of the case are as follows:- The petitioner was an Assistant Teacher in the concerned school under the respondents, Education Department and he retired from Service with effect from 30.09.1995. The learned Advocate for the petitioner submits that the respondent authorities issued Pension Payment Order (PPO) on 09.09.1999 and the gratuity amount was received on 07.12.1999. As such, the respondent authorities have delayed to pay the gratuity amount. The Learned Advocate further submits that his client approached the respondent authorities to claim interest on the delayed payment of gratuity amount but they had not considered the same. Hence, the petitioner has filed the writ-petition seeking relief to pay interest at the rate of 10% per annum on the gratuity amount. He further submits that his client rendered long service with the respondent authorities in the concerned school without any break and without any adverse remark. The learned Advocate also cited two decisions, one of which Atul Chandra Mahata Vs. State & Ors. and another, 2004 1 CalLJ 191 decision S.K. Dua Vs. State of Haryana & Anr, 2008 3 SCC 44 . The learned Advocate further submits that as per Payment of Graqtuity Act, 1972, amount has to be paid to the petitioner within a period of 45 days but the same has not been complied with. Hence, this writ-petition is filed before this Court for direction upon the respondents and the Education Department to pay the interest at the rate of 10% per annum on the delayed payment of gratuity amount.
(3.) Learned Advocate for the State admitted that the petitioner has served the concerned school for a long period and has retired from service on the date as mentioned above. It is further submitted that the delay is not deliberate one but due to legal formalities and administrative process and as such the petitioner is not entitled to receive interest on the gratuity amount. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the argument advanced by the learned advocates for both the parties, this Court is of the view that there is a delay in paying the gratuity amount. Hence the petitioner is entitled to receive simple interest at the rate of 9% per annum on the delayed payment of gratuity amount i.e. from 01.10.1995 till the date of receipt of the gratuity amount.;