Unexplained departmental delay in pension arrears warrants 8% interest until payment.

The applicant, a retired Draftsman Grade-I of the Survey of India, superannuated on 31 August 2014.

Departmental proceedings initiated against him before retirement were quashed by the Tribunal in O.A. No. 282/2012 by order dated 17 January 2023, which attained finality.

The applicant subsequently sought revision and payment of pensionary benefits, including revised pension arrears and Fixed Medical Allowance.

During the pendency of the present application, the respondents released those amounts.

The applicant consequently confined his claim to interest on the delayed payment from 1 February 2025 until the date of actual credit.

The respondents opposed the claim, contending that the delay was neither intentional nor deliberate and that, since payment had been made, the application had become infructuous.

1. Whether the applicant was entitled to interest on the delayed payment of revised pension arrears and Fixed Medical Allowance from 1 February 2025 until the date of actual credit, where the delay was not attributable to him

2. Whether the respondents’ failure to provide a detailed explanation for the delay justified an award of interest and permitted fixation of responsibility upon the officers or officials responsible for the delay

The Tribunal applied the principle that pension and other retiral dues must be released promptly and that interest is payable where delay in disbursement is attributable to the department under the applicable Pension Rules.

It relied on State of Kerala & Ors. v. M. Padmanabhan Nair, 1985 SCR (2) 476, R. Kapur v. Director of Inspection (Painting and Publication), Income Tax, (1994) 6 SCC 589, Vijay L. Mehrotra v. State of U.P., AIR 2000 SC 3513, and Gangahanume Gowda v. Karnataka Agro Industries Corporation Ltd., (2003) 3 SCC 40, recognising the settled law that unjustified delay in payment of pensionary benefits can attract interest.

The Tribunal also referred to governmental instructions requiring timely release of retirement dues and fixation of responsibility for delay.

The Tribunal found that the departmental proceedings had already been quashed and that the order had attained finality.

The respondents were therefore expected to process the applicant’s consequential pensionary entitlements, including revised pension benefits, promptly and carefully.

Their counter-affidavit did not explain the cause, duration, or level at which the delay occurred, nor did it allege that the delay was attributable to the applicant.

The fact that the payments were eventually released did not extinguish the applicant’s accrued claim for compensatory interest.

Applying the settled principle governing delayed pension payments, the Tribunal considered 8% interest appropriate from the date claimed by the applicant, namely 1 February 2025, until the date on which the arrears were credited.

The payment was directed to be made within 60 days from receipt of a copy of the order.

The respondents were also granted liberty to fix responsibility upon the officer(s) or official(s) responsible for the delay and, where appropriate, recover the interest burden from them.

The pending miscellaneous application, if any, was disposed of, with costs made easy.