Structured Summary of the Opinion (J.R. Chopra, J.)

Factual and Procedural Background

The petitioner retired from the post of Executive Engineer, Irrigation C.A.D., Suratgarh on 30/11/1983. His pension case was not finalised for a considerable period; only a provisional pension was paid from 8/10/1985. The petitioner filed the present writ petition on 15/07/1988. During the pendency of the petition the final pension and gratuity were paid on 14/10/1988. Prior to that date an amount of Rs. 5,000/- was retained by the Department out of the gratuity. The petitioner sought interest from the date the pension became due and interest on the retained gratuity.

Legal Issues Presented

1. Whether the petitioner was entitled to interest on the pension from the date the pension became due until final payment.
2. Whether the amount of Rs. 5,000/-, which had been retained out of the gratuity, should be paid to the petitioner with interest.
3. Whether pending departmental enquiries and punishments (censure; stoppage of one grade increment without cumulative effect) justified withholding finalisation of the pension and gratuity.

Arguments of the Parties

Petitioner's Arguments (as presented by Mr. Singhvi)

• The petitioner contended that pension became due on retirement and was not finalised for a long period; only provisional pension was paid from 8/10/1985.
• The final pension and gratuity were not paid until 14/10/1988, and an amount of Rs. 5,000/- had been retained by the Department.
• The petitioner prayed for interest from the date the pension became due and interest on the retained gratuity amount.

Respondent's Arguments (as presented by Mr. Hemant Choudhary)

• There were certain departmental enquiry proceedings pending against the petitioner at the time of retirement; in one he was censured and in another one grade increment was stopped (without cumulative effect) and other proceedings were dropped after retirement.
• Because enquiries were pending, the pension case could not be finalised immediately and only provisional pension was paid; after enquiries were dropped, the pension and gratuity were finalised and paid.
• The censure does not affect pension, and the stoppage of one grade increment related to 1978 and was without cumulative effect; pension and gratuity are payable on the basis of the last pay drawn, so these punishments could not have affected pension calculation.
• Accordingly, the respondents contended there was no delay in payment attributable to them once the enquiries concluded.

Table of Precedents Cited

No precedents were cited in the provided opinion.

Court's Reasoning and Analysis

The court reviewed the factual matrix: retirement on 30/11/1983, provisional pension from 8/10/1985, filing of the writ petition on 15/07/1988, and final payment of pension and gratuity on 14/10/1988 with Rs. 5,000/- retained by the Department.

The court considered the respondents' explanation that departmental enquiries were pending at the time of retirement, that one enquiry resulted in censure and another in stoppage of one grade increment (without cumulative effect), and that other enquiries were dropped after retirement. The court noted the respondents' submission that the punishments (particularly censure and a non-cumulative stoppage of increment relating to 1978) did not, in principle, affect pension entitlement calculated on last pay drawn.

Weighing these facts and submissions, the court stated it was not inclined to award interest from the date the pension became due. However, the court held that in the peculiar facts and circumstances before it the petitioner was nevertheless entitled to interest on the amounts finally determined, and on the gratuity and the retained Rs. 5,000/-, at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of filing of the writ petition (15/07/1988) until the date of final payment (14/10/1988) or until actual payment where specified.

The court directed that the arrears, including the retained Rs. 5,000/-, together with interest at 12% per annum calculated from the date of the writ petition until payment, should be paid to the petitioner. The court specified a timeline for compliance: payment to be made within three months from the date of the judgment.

Holding and Implications

Final Disposition: The writ petition stands disposed of on merits with directions that:

• The petitioner is awarded interest at the rate of 12% per annum on the amount finally determined (pension arrears) from the date of filing of the writ petition (15/07/1988) until the date of final payment (14/10/1988).
• Interest at the rate of 12% per annum is also awarded on the gratuity from the date of filing of the writ petition until the date of final payment (14/10/1988).
• The amount of Rs. 5,000/- retained from the gratuity is payable to the petitioner, with interest at 12% per annum from the date of the writ petition until the date of payment.
• All arrears and interest ordered are to be paid within three months from the date of the judgment.

Implications: The decision directs specific monetary payments and interest to the petitioner as relief in this case. The opinion does not discuss broader legal principle development or purport to set a new precedent; its effect is the direct settlement of the petitioner's claims in the particular factual circumstances presented.

This summary is confined to and derived exclusively from the contents of the provided opinion text.