VIRENDRA KILEDAR Vs. SATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY filing this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioner has prayed for a direction to the respondents to pay interest at the rate of 18% on delayed payment of arrears of second financial up -gradation (kramonnati), arrears of benefit of grant of 6th Pay Commission and also delayed payment of encashment of earn leave. Shri O.P. Saxena, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner retired on attaining the age of superannuation on 31.1.2007. He filed W.P. No. 1277/08 for grant of benefit of second kramonnati w.e.f. 19.4.99. The said petition was decided on 17.3.2008. Thereafter, the respondents have granted him the arrears of increments w.e.f. 19.4.1999. Earlier the benefit of second kramonnati was not granted from that date. It is contended that the arrears of second kramonnati w.e.f. 19.4.99 was granted on 19.5.11. It is further contended that 6th Pay Commission benefits were given to the employees w.e.f. 1.1.2006. The petitioner was given the arrears of this w.e.f. 9.5.11. It is further submitted that for grant of benefit of leave encashment the petitioner had to file W.P. No. 2948/2008 which was decided on 13.10.2010. This Court directed the respondents to make the payment of earn leave of 240 days. It is submitted that this benefit was granted on 12.7.2011. It is submitted that the delayed payments on the aforesaid three counts were solely attributable to the respondents. The respondents should have paid these amounts on due dates and since there is unreasonable, unjustifiable and improper delay in making payments, the petitioner is entitled to get interest on delayed payment.

(2.) PRAYER is opposed by Shri B. Raj Pandey, Govt. Advocate. By placing reliance on page 2 of the return, it is submitted that the finalization of pension papers consumes some time, the department needs to collect the entire record from different places and, therefore, for this delay no interest needs to be paid.

(3.) THIS is settled in law that if the payment is due to an employee and it is not paid to him on due date, the employer is bound to pay interest on delayed payment. The Apex Court has taken this view in : (1994) 2 SCC 240 (Union of India v. Justice S.S. Sandhawala (Retd.) and others). This view was followed in, (2006) 6 SCC 455 (Union of India and another v. M.S. Abdulla) and : (2008) 3 SCC 44 (S.K. Dua v. State of Haryana and another). A Division Bench of this Court in : 2013 (1) M.P.L.J. 53 (State of M.P. and others v. Ramji Das Agrawal) has taken the same view.