Belated payment of retirement benefits attracts interest at 6% per annum.

The petitioner, a Special Grade Conductor, retired on 30 June 2025 after approximately 30 years of service.

His retirement benefits were disbursed on 11 March 2026. After his representation seeking interest for the delay received no response, he filed this writ petition seeking interest at 6% per annum on his delayed terminal benefits.

The respondents confirmed that the benefits had been settled on 11 March 2026.

Whether the petitioner was entitled to interest on retirement benefits disbursed after his retirement.

If so, whether interest at 6% per annum should be directed, and for what period.

In S.K. Dua v. State of Haryana, (2008) 3 SCC 44, the Supreme Court held that an employee may claim interest on delayed retiral benefits under applicable statutory rules or administrative instructions; even in their absence, such a claim may be founded on Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution.

The Court also relied on the Division Bench’s common order in W.A.(MD) No. 403 of 2010 and connected matters, dated 4 July 2014, which held that delayed payment of transport-corporation retirement benefits may attract interest notwithstanding the absence of an express provision for interest, and fixed the rate at 6% per annum.

The Court found that the petitioner’s benefits had been paid belatedly, as he retired on 30 June 2025 but received payment only on 11 March 2026.

Applying S.K. Dua and the Division Bench’s decision on the same issue, the Court held that delayed retirement benefits should be compensated by interest, notwithstanding the absence of a specific interest provision in the pension-fund rules.

Payment was ordered within six months from receipt of a copy of the order. No costs were awarded.