After hearing counsel for the parties and perusal of record with their assistance, we find that once the appellant stood voluntarily retired w.e.f. 01.08.2010, by operation of law, as contemplated u/R.50 of the Rules, 1996, it was expected from the appointing authority to grant him voluntary retirement on his application but as it is an usual practice of the State that every matter, brought to the court, has to be contested and no one is there to look into such matters and the practice of the Government is to contest the matter after the cognizance is taken by this court, and since the ld.Single Judge of this court has arrived to a conclusion that by operation of law, the appellant stood voluntarily retired w.e.f. 01.08.2010, in our considered view, in absence of there being any allegation of delay, which could be attributable to the appellant, that certainly makes him entitled to grant of interest u/R.89 of the Rules, 1996 for the delay in disbursement of payment of retiral dues. It is informed to this court that the retiral dues were released to him at a later stage but as already observed by us, as the delay not being attributable to him, he is entitled to interest over the retiral dues, in terms of R.89 of the scheme of Rules, 1996 from the date he stood voluntarily retired from service by operation of law w.e.f. 01.08.2010 and whatever payments already made may be adjusted and the interest shall be calculated accordingly.
