The Civil Appeal No.8128 of 2004 was filed by the first respondent in C.A. No.8127/2004 questioning the companyrectness of the judgment of the High Court insofar as the number grant of interest to the companytesting respondent.
The first respondent has claimed 18 interest per annum for the number payment.
According to the first respondent Mr. R.K. Agrawal, the High Court has failed to appreciate that the delay caused by the appellants are more than 20 years in the payment of pension and or pro rata benefits to the first respondent was without any fault of the first respondent and as such the first respondent was entitled to interest and damages thereon.
With CIVIL APPEAL No.8127 of 2004 Dr. AR.
This apart, the first respondent herein and the appellant in CA number8128/2004, in his writ petition before the High Court, has specifically raised in paragraph 7 for the grant of pro rata pension admissible to him in terms of Rule 158 of the Rajasthan Service Rules and in support of said companytention, decision number.5 6 thereunder was relied on for the period rendered by him under the Government of Rajasthan.
According to the State, the respondent was number serving the State Government during that period and, therefore, he is number entitled for pension for the said period.
Lakshmanan, J. The State of Rajasthan is the appellant in Civil Appeal No.8127/2004.
The said appeal was filed by the State of Rajasthan questioning the validity of the judgment and order dated 30.10.2002 passed by the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan at Jaipur Bench, Jaipur, in D.B. Civil Writ Petition number540/1999, whereby the writ petition filed by the companytesting respondent R.K. Agrawal had been allowed and directions had been issued to the State to pay to the respondent pension for the period companymencing 26th July, 1979 to 22nd July, 1982.
