By the Court.—Heard Sri D.C. Mukerjee, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. The controversy relates to payment of interest over the delayed payment of gratuity and commutation of pension by the respondents.

2. The brief facts giving rise to the present writ petition are that the petitioner was initially appointed as Overseer on 30.8.1963 in the irrigation department and later on he was promoted to the post of Assistant Engineer on 6.3.1998. While working in Saryu Canal Division in district Bahraich, he retired from service on 30.6.1998. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, at the time of retirement of the petitioner, neither any departmental proceeding was pending nor any other enquiry was going on, which could have created hurdle in payment of post retiral dues. In spite of the fact that the petitioner retired in June 1998, the gratuity and commuted pension were paid in September 2000. Accordingly, the petitioner claims payment of interest from the period June 1998 to September 2000. Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the Apex Court’s judgments reported in 1999 (2) UPLBEC 1006, Dr. Uma Agrawal