[2025:RJ-JP:13389] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5027/2018 Dalchand Sharma S/o Shri Kailash Chand Sharma, R/o C-13, Akshardham Line No. 1, Tekda Road Borkheda Kota Raj. ----Petitioner Versus 1. Jaipur Vidyut Vitranan Nigam Limited, Vidyut Bhavan Jyoti Nagar, Jaipur Through Its Managing Director. 2. Karmik Adhikari Kota Division Jaipur Vidyut Vitranan Nigam Limited, Khai Road Nayapura, Power House, Kota. 3. Dy. Director, Personnel Pension, Jaipur Vidyut Vitranan Nigam Limited, Vidyut Bhavan, Jyoti Nagar, Jaipur. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr.Govind Prasad Kaushik For Respondent(s) : Mr.Vijay Kumar Gupta JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 25/03/2025 1. By way of filing this writ petition, a prayer has been made for issuing direction to the respondents for releasing the retiral dues to the petitioner along-with interest. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner stood retired on 31.08.2017, after attaining the age of superannuation, but his retiral dues were withheld by the respondents for the reasons best known to them. Hence, under the compelling circumstances, he has approached this Court by way of filing the instant writ petition. 3. Learned counsel for the respondent-State submits that the relief sought for, in this writ petition has already been granted and [2025:RJ-JP:13389] (2 of 3) [CW-5027/2018] complete retiral dues have already been released in favour of the petitioner in the month of July, 2021, hence, under these circumstances, this petition has become infructuous. 4. In the rebuttal, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the retiral dues of the petitioner were withheld by the respondents for a considerable time of more than three years, without any justified reason. Counsel submits that the document dated 22.02.2018 has been annexed, indicating that the petitioner remained absent with effect from 01.05.2016 till 30.06.2016 due to which, the matter was kept pending and unnecessary delay has been caused. Counsel submits that there was no reason available with the respondents to pass the aforesaid office order, when the matter was already closed way back on 19.04.2017 (Annx.5) which indicates that the said absence period of the petitioner is mentioned as ‘NIL’ and the services of the petitioner were found to be satisfactory. Counsel submits that under these circumstances, the petitioner is entitled to get interest @ 9% p.a. for the delayed payment of retiral dues. 5. Heard and considered the submissions made at Bar and perused the material available on record. 6. Considering the arguments put forward by the learned counsel for the petitioner and looking to the fact that the matter with regard to the absence of the petitioner with effect from 01.05.2016 till 31.05.2016 and 01.06.2016 till 30.06.2016 was considered and closed by the respondents prior to retirement of the petitioner, by order dated 19.04.2017 and his absence period was treated as ‘NIL’, hence, under these circumstances, there is no reason or occasion available with the respondents to pass the [2025:RJ-JP:13389] (3 of 3) [CW-5027/2018] subsequent Office order dated 22.02.2018, that too after retirement of the petitioner. 7. Hence, in the considered opinion of this Court the respondents were not justified in withholding the rightful claim of the petitioner for getting retiral dues and because of causing unnecessary delay in releasing the retiral dues, the petitioner is also entitled to get interest @ 9% p.a. 8. With the aforesaid observation, the instant writ petition stands disposed of. 9. Needless to observe, the respondents would comply with the order passed by this Court within a period of three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. 10. Stay application and all other pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J Aayush Sharma /54