AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
8 paragraphs · 231 wordsB.K. Shrivastava, Member (J)
Shri A.D. Singh, counsel for the applicant.
Shri V.K. Pandey, counsel for the respondents.
Final argument heard. This OA was filed in 2013 for releasing the retiral benefit and arrear of pension etc to the applicant. The applicant was retired on 31.07.2009. The OA was filed in 2013. At the time of filing this OA, no any retiral benefit was given to the applicant. During the pendency of this OA, payments were released. It is agreed to both parties that all retiral benefits have been given to the applicant. Therefore, only the question remaining is about interest.
The counsel for the applicant relied upon 2002 SCC (L&S) 278 Vijay L. Mehrotra vs. State of UP and submit that the appropriate interest should be awarded.
The counsel for the respondents opposed the aforesaid contention. But it is clearly established that after retirement on 31.07.2009, the department withhold the entire payment for a long time and the payments were released only after filing the OA in 2013.
Therefore, after consideration, the OA is allowed. The respondents are directed to grant the simple interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of retirement i.e. 31.07.2009 to the actual date of payment of each amount, within the period of six months from today.
The OA is disposed of with such direction. No costs.