Manmohan Sarin, J.

( 1 ) BY this common judgment Civil Writ No. 5808/02 titled as Gella Ram Vaswani and Anr. Vs. M. C. D. And Civil writ No. 1139/03 titled as Inderjit Kaur Vs. M. C. D. are being decided as similar facts and common question of law is involved.

( 2 ) PETITIONERS had filed the above writ petitions seeking directions to the respondent-MCD to release pensionary benefits/ gratuity, together with interest at the rate of 18 p. a. on account of delay entailed in its payments. The facts relating to the individual petitioners may be briefly noted.

( 3 ) PETITIONER No. 1, Gella Ram Vaswani, in CW no. 5808/02, joined the Municipal Corporation on 1. 10. 1955 as an Assistant Teacher. He superannuated as Headmaster of a school on 31. 7. 1988. The gratuity amount of rs. 37,950/- (Rupees thirty seven thousand and nine hundred and fifty only was not paid on superannuation and was withheld. It was paid on 31. 10. 2003. Petitioner No. 2 smt. Janki Radhwani is with widow of late Sh. Mohan radhwani who had joined the Municipal Corporation in 1961 as Junior Engineer (Civil ). Late Mohan Radhwani was promoted as Asstt. Engineer. Unfortunately he expired on 9. 2. 1993. Petitioner No. 2 Janki Radhwani, widow of late mohan Radhwani was paid the family pension, yet the death- cum-gratuity payment was withheld. Petitioner No. 2 made several representations. She submitted "no Dues certificate" on 20. 11. 1996. A no Dues Certificate from the Land and Estate Department was also submitted on 26. 9. 2001 yet the death-cum-gratuity payment was not released. Death-cum-gratuity amounting to Rs. 97,600 was paid on 21. 6. 2004. Both the petitioners claim interest at the rate of 18% pa. from the date gratuity became payable till the date it was paid.

( 4 ) SMT. INDERJIT Kaur, petitioner in CW No. 1139/03 is the widow of late Sh. Gurdarshan Singh who had joined mcd as Asstt. Teacher. Late Gurdarshan Singh superannuated as Headmaster on 30. 6. 1988. Petitioner as widow was entitled to the family pension as also the gratuity. The Chief Accountant (Pension) had informed the petitioner that pension of Rs. 1318/- plus DA, admissible along with one time gratuity of Rs. 44,138/- had been approved by the Chief Accountant on 1. 7. 1988. Respondent- mcd failed to release the gratuity amount and the same was paid only on 16. 3. 2004. The petitioner had been in occupation of the premises allotted to her husband which were vacated on 30. 4. 2001. Repeated opportunities in c. W. 5808/02, from October, 2002 to March,2004 were given to the respondent to file the counter affidavit but the same was not filed. Similarly in CW No. 1139/03 opportunities to file counter affidavit were given from may,2003 to 16. 3. 2004, yet the counter affidavit was not filed. Arguments were heard in the Civil Writ petitions on 13. 9. 2004 and the judgment reserved.

( 5 ) MS. GITA Mehrotra who appears on behalf of respondent-MCD submits that gratuity payment was withheld in these cases as the petitioners had not vacated the allotted accommodation even after retirment. Besides, she submits that there was delay in furnishing of the no dues Certificate. The cases were processed when premises were vacated and No Dues Certificate and clearance were received.

( 6 ) THE questions which arise for consideration are; firstly whether respondents could withhold the payment of gratuity on the ground of non-vacation of the allotted premises and the delay in furnishing of the No Dues certificate? Secondly the entitlement of the petitioners to claim interest and the rate thereof.

( 7 ) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on the decision of Division Bench of this Court in LPA No. 118/89 relating to the cases where number of petitioners had filed writ petitions against the corporation claiming the flats/ quarters in their occupation to be allotted to them on the basis of resolution passed by the MCD. Pending the hearing of appeals and petitions, stay of dispossession had been grante

Click Here to Read the rest of this document