RAM LAKHAN SINGH Vs. SRI HAR DEO SINGH, DIRECTOR AND STHANEEYA NIKAY AND ORS.
LAWS(ALL)-2010-8-407
HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Decided on August 05,2010

RAM LAKHAN SINGH Appellant
VERSUS
Sri Har Deo Singh, Director And Sthaneeya Nikay And Ors. Respondents

JUDGEMENT

Vikram Nath, J. - (1.) HEARD the learned Counsel for the applicant and Sri S.D. Kautilya, learned Counsel appearing for the opposite parties.
(2.) THE Writ Court vide judgment and order dated 19.8.2003 had allowed the writ petition of the applicant. The operative portion of the judgment reads as follows: For the reasons stated above, the writ petition is allowed. The respondents are directed to pay arrears of revised pay scale and other retiral benefits to the petitioner within one month from today with 10% interest on the unpaid amount till the date of actual payment. If the amount is not paid within the aforesaid period by the respondent, the same shall be recovered as arrears of land revenue within further period of one month and paid to the petitioner by the Collector concerned. In addition to the directions contained in the order dated 19.8.2003, the Writ Court had further provided vide order dated 26.5.2004 that the applicant would be entitled to the promotional pay scales w.e.f. 1.7.1994.
(3.) WHEN the directions of the Writ Court were not being complied with the present contempt application was filed. Upon issue of notices a counter affidavit was filed in September, 2004. As per Annexure No. 3 to the counter affidavit, a statement has been annexed, giving details of the calculation. The Writ Court had awarded interest @ 10% on the unpaid amount till the date of actual payment. From a perusal of the statement, referred to above, it appears that only 10% amount had been added as interest treating it to be as one time enhancement. The applicant admittedly retired in 1997. Even if it is treated that the amounts of the post retiral dues were payable in 1997 or on 1.1.1998, which admittedly were being calculated and paid in September, 2004 i.e. after a lapse of seven years, the calculation of interest is not in accordance with the directions contained in the judgment of the Writ Court. Thus there is clear disobedience on the part of the opposite parties by not paying the amounts due to the applicant as per the judgment of the Writ Court.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.