Arvind Kumar vs Shri Santosh Kumar Sinha, Addl. General Manager/ Ltd. Mankapur Gonda and Another — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Arvind Kumar vs Shri Santosh Kumar Sinha, Addl. General Manager/ Ltd. Mankapur Gonda and Another — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Court found the applicant entitled to interest on delayed post retiral dues as directed by the Writ Court; respondent granted three weeks' time to file further compliance affidavit, failing which respondent no. 1 to appear in person before the Court on the next date of listing; case listed in the week commencing 09.03.2026.

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicant is entitled to interest on the delayed payment of post retiral benefits (privilege leave encashment), notwithstanding the respondent's plea that the claim is barred by limitation due to delay and laches.

Court's answer

There was delay on the part of the respondent in making payment of post retiral dues, for which the applicant is entitled to interest, as directed by the Writ Court.

Ratio / Principle

The Supreme Court's judgment in Indian Telephone Industries Limited v. Rama Kant Srivastava is of no help to the respondent, as the Supreme Court did not set aside the judgment passed in the writ petition, which was passed in the applicant's case.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Contempt Application (CIVIL) No. 3776 of 2025 (Allahabad High Court, Lucknow Bench, Court No. 8; Manish Kumar, J.; decision dated February 6, 2026) — Arvind Kumar v. Santosh Kumar Sinha, Addl. General Manager/Ltd. Mankapur Gonda and Another. At the compliance stage of a contempt proceeding arising out of non-payment of post retiral dues, the Court recorded that the applicant retired in 2016 and payment of privilege leave encashment was made only in 2021, i.e., after a delay of more than about 5 years, a fact which learned counsel for the respondent was unable to dispute. The Court held there was delay on the part of the respondent in making payment of post retiral dues, for which the applicant is entitled to interest as directed by the Writ Court, rejecting the respondent's reliance on an order dated 08.01.2026 denying interest on the ground of limitation/delay and laches. The respondent's reliance on Indian Telephone Industries Limited v. Rama Kant Srivastava was held to be of no help, since the Supreme Court had not set aside the writ petition judgment passed in the applicant's case. Three weeks were allowed for filing a further compliance affidavit, failing which respondent no. 1 was directed to appear in person; matter listed in the week commencing 09.03.2026.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 3776 of 2025

Arvind Kumar

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

Shri Santosh Kumar Sinha, Addl. General Manager/ Ltd. Mankapur Gonda And Another

.....Opposite Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Abhay Kumar Ojha
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: Dwijendra Mishra

Court No. - 8

HON'BLE MANISH KUMAR, J.

Respondent no. 1 has filed a compliance affidavit, which is taken on record.

Learned Counsel for the respondent no. 1 has submitted that claim of the applicant for payment of interest @ 7% annum on the delayed payment of post retiral benefits of the privilege leave encashment has been denied by passing of the order dated 08.01.2026 on the ground that the privilege leave encashment is barred by limitation on account of delay and laches on the part of applicant.

Learned Counsel for the respondent has relied upon the judgment and order of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Indian Telephone Industries Limited Vs. Rama Kant Srivastava and others. The said judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court is of no help of the respondent as by the said judgment, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has not set aside the judgment passed in the writ petition as the same has been passed in the case of the applicant.

On the other hand, learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that applicant had retired in the year 2016 and the payment was made in the year 2021 with delay and more than about 5 years.

Learned Counsel for the respondent is unable to dispute the said submission.

Learned Counsel for the applicant has further submitted that the applicant is entitled for interest for the period from the date of his retirement in the year 2016 till the payment was made in the year 2021.

After hearing learned counsel for the parties and going through the record of the case, it is found that there was a delay on the part of the respondent in making payment of post retiral dues for which the applicant is entitled for interest, as directed by the Writ Court.

CAPL No. 3776 of 2025

2

At this stage, learned counsel for the respondent prays for and is granted three weeks' time for filing further compliance affidavit failing which the respondent no. 1 shall appear before this Court in person on the next date of listing.

List this case in the week commencing 09.03.2026.

February 6, 2026 Nitesh

(Manish Kumar,J.)

Digitally signed by :- NITESH KUMAR TEWARY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench