GANDHI, J. - (1.) THE petitioner seeks a direction to the respondents to pay interest @ 12% per annum to the petitioner for delayed payment of retiral benefits and also seeks further direction to pay a sum of Rs. 6,000/- towards medical aid to the petitioner.
(2.) THE petitioner superannuated on 31. 12. 1996 as Accountant from the Dr. S. N. Medical College, Jodhpur. He requested the Principal, Medical College, Jodhpur on 26. 11. 1996 to release his retiral benefits and also made an application on 24. 2. 1997 for commutation of pension. He also conveyed to the respondents that there is no inquiry pending or any amount due towards the Government. THE respondent made payment of commutation money less to that was due, to the tune of Rs. 3,869/ -. On these grounds, he seeks relief on account of delayed payment. The respondents have filed reply stating therein that time has been consumed in correspondence within the department/departments as the service record of the petitioner could not be made available for preparation of pension case of the petitioner. As soon as the record was available, the pension was sanctioned. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the respondents have not denied the delayed payment of the retiral benefits. On perusal of the record, it is seen that no specific averment has been made in rebuttal by the respondents that the payment was made in time. The only reason shown is that the department was engaged in correspondence for obtaining the service record of the petitioner and preparation of the pension case. Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Dr. Ratanlal Mathur vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. , D. B. Special Appeal (Writ) No. 297/1995, decided on 12. 9. 1997 whereby the Division Bench has issued certain directions including that the retiral benefits be paid to the retire within 60 days unless there are exceptional circumstances otherwise the retiree shall be entitled to 12% interest from the date till the actual payment is made after 60 days of his retirement. The Division Bench also observed that the concerned party shall fix the liability for the delayed payment.
(3.) THE retiral benefits have been paid to the petitioner in the month of August, 1999, though the petitioner was retired on 31. 12. 1996. THE petitioner has made out a case for the relief prayed for as the respondents have not made out any case of exceptional circumstances to deny relief to the petitioner. However, the petitioner seeks also Rs. 6000/- as medical aid. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that it is part of the retiral benefits. On quarry from the Court he changed his stand and submitted that it is a medical claim, which has been submitted to the respondents. There is no evidence on record that he has submitted such bills to the respondents, which has not been honoured and paid by the respondents. This claim is accordingly, rejected. However if such bills have been furnished to the respondents by the petitioner, the respondents may consider in accordance with law. Accordingly, the petition is partly allowed and the respondents are directed to make payment of interest @ 12% per annum on the delayed payment of the retiral benefits w. e. f. 1. 3. 1997. . ;