JUDGMENT
Tipnis, J.
1. The petitioner joined the services of the Bombay Port Trust as a clerk-cum-typist in the year 1947 and retired on April 30, 1987 after attaining the age of superannuation i.e. 58 years. During his entire tenure he was inflicted with one penalty of reduction of pay by one stage from Rs. 1630 to Rs. 1589 in time scale of Rs. 900-40-1220-41-1630 by order dated April 29, 1987. Subsequently he was paid certain amount by way of his contributory provident fund, voluntary provident fund, and death-cum-retirement gratuity on different dates. As the petitioner was not paid the amount of employer’s contribution and the interest thereon the petitioner entertained correspondence with the authorities concerned. It appears that thereafter certain other amounts were also paid on different dates, but still employer’s contribution to the provident fund account and interest thereon was withheld.
2. The petitioner has filed this petition against the Bombay Port Trust claiming interest for delayed payment as also amount of employer’s contribution with interest thereon at 18% p.a.
3. Affidavit in reply has been filed on behalf of the Bombay Port Trust. It is mentioned that a complaint was filed against the petitioner and in pursuance to the complaint police have filed criminal case bearing C.R. No. 319 of 1987 in the Court of Metropolitan Magistrate, 33rd Court, Ballard Estate, Bombay and by virtue of rule 16 of the Bombay Port Trust Rules of Provident Fund payment of employer’s contribution and interest thereon has been withheld. It is stated that inasmuch as the said criminal case is still pending, petitioner is not entitled to the aforesaid amount of employer’s contribution.
4. We have heard Shri K. S. Ramaswamy for the petitioner and Shri P. Ramaswamy for the Bombay Port Trust. Both the learned counsel reiterated their contentions as found in their respective Pleadings.
5. Rule 16 on which reliance placed by the learned counsel for the Port Trust provides that in the case of a subscriber who is concerned in any loss of Port Trust fund or other irregularity which is the subject matter of an enquiry, the payment of the Board’s contribution and the interest thereon shall not, be made until the conclusion of the enquiry, unless the Board, in the case of scheduled permanent staff and the Chairman in the case of scheduled temporary and non scheduled permanent staff is satisfied that the results of the enquiry need not be awaited. On proper reading of this rule we have no manner of doubt that the enquiry contemplated therein is domestic enquiry. It is further to be appreciated that from the first information report copy of which is made available to us it is clear that the date and hour when the offence was reported is 14.30 hours on June 15, 1987 i.e. long after petitioner was retained on April 30, 1987. As such we are of the opinion that there was no question of withholding any payment and the said payment had to be made to the petitioner. We also find merit in the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is entitled to reasonable interest for the delayed payment.
6. It is an agreed position before us, between both the learned counsel and we must make a special mention that the petitioner himself who as of now is practicing lawyer is present in the Court that so far as the balance of employer’s contribution is concerned the amount is Rs. 70,000/-. As such petitioner shall be entitled not only to this employer’s contribution but also interest thereon at 18% p.a. from two months after the date of retirement which date is taken for the sake of convenience. We propose to calculate the said interest for a period of 10 years. As such petitioner shall be entitled to and the Bombay Port Trust shall be liable to pay to the petitioner, an amount of Rs. 70,000/- by way of employer’s contribution as also an amount of Rs. 75,000/- by. way of interest on the said amount for a period of 10 years. In addition to that the petitioner shall be entitled to interest on delayed payment of his contribution of Rs. 70,000/-. The petitioner retired on April 30, 1987, so by giving some period for paper work and calculations, petitioner ought to have been this amount latest by June 30, 1987. The pal amount was in fact paid some time on January 14, 1988. We are of the opinion that the petitioner should be granted interest at the rate of 18% p.a. on this amount of Rs. 70,000/- for a period of 6 months which comes to Rs. 6,300/-. The petitioner is also entitled to interest at 18% p.a. on the amount of Rs. 7,457/- which was paid to him on June 14, 1988. We are calculating the amount of interest at 18% p.a. on Rs. 7,000/- for a period of 11 months which comes to Rs. 1260.
7. As such petitioner shall be entitled to an amount of Rs. 70,000/- plus Rs. 75,600/- plus Rs. 6,300/- plus Rs. 1,260/-, aggregating to Rs. 1,53,160/- which shall be paid to the petitioner by the Bombay Port Trust on or before February 15, 1997.
8. In the result Rule made absolute in the aforesaid terms. Petitioner shall get his cost from the respondents. Certified copy expedited.