BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J (ORAL)

1. These writ petitions, one filed by Chiranji Lal and the other filed by the Delhi Development Authority (DDA) are both directed against the same order dated 15.04.2009 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi in T.A. No. 34/2008.

2. Chiranji Lal, who is the petitioner in W.P. (C) No. 11684/2009, is aggrieved by the impugned order on account of the fact that he has not been given arrears of pay and only notional promotion was given with effect from 28.1.1993 till 31.08.1995, the date on which he retired. He is claiming arrears of pay for that duration and since the Tribunal did not grant him the prayer with regard to the arrears of pay for that period, he has filed this writ petition before us.

3. Insofar as the DDA is concerned, it is aggrieved by the impugned order on account of the fact that the Tribunal has allowed interest on gratuity, commutation of pension and leave encashment at the GPF rate of interest. According to the DDA, interest was not payable on any of those items. Insofar as the question of grant of arrears of pay for the duration of 28.1.1993 to 31.08.1995 is concerned, the learned counsel for