Disposed

Kuldeep Singh v. the Hrtc and Others

Himachal Pradesh HC7 Nov 2023CWP/5433/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Retired yardmaster filed writ petition seeking revised retiral benefits and interest. Court directed Managing Director to decide petitioner's fresh representation within 10 days mandating release of benefits with 6% interest, reserving merits footage due to pending review in related case.

What did the court decide?

Direct Respondent No.1 to decide fresh representation within 10 days and release retiral benefits with 6% interest from due date.

Kuldeep Singh Vs the Hrtc and Others — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Himachal Pradesh HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA CWP No. 5433 of 2023 Decided on: 07.11.2023

¶2

Kuldeep Singh ……..Petitioner

¶3

Versus

¶4

Himachal Road Transport Corporation & Others

¶5

…….Respondents

¶6

Coram HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJAN SHARMA, JUDGE

¶7

WHETHER APPROVED FOR REPORTING? For the petitioners : Mr. Neel Kamal Sharma, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. Vinod Kumar Gupta, Advocate.

¶8

Ranjan Sharma, (Oral)

¶9

The petitioner, a retiree from the post of yardmaster on 30.11.2022, has filed the instant writ petition, for the grant of following relief:-

¶10

“i) That respondents may kindly be directed to released/make actual payment of all remaining retiral benefits such as gratuity (more than Rs.15 Lac), earned leave (Rs.10 Lac) and arrears on account of revised pay scle w.e.f. 01.01.2016 of the petitioner alongwith 9% interest forthwith, for delay on the part of respondent corporation and loss of accretion of

¶11

¶12

capital, from due date till actual payment is made, being a squarely covered matter with CWP No.3050/2014, titled as Nek Ram vs. State of H.P. & Others. Further, respondents may also be directed to pay interest on the delayed payments from the due date.”

¶13

Case of the petitioner, as submitted by learned

¶14

counsel is that, the petitioner was retired from the service of the Himachal Road Transport Corporation on 30.11.2022. It is further submitted that consequent upon the revision of the pay scales by the State Government which have been adopted by the Respondent-Corporation also, the respondents have not released the arrears of pay and the revised retiral benefits i.e. Revised Pension, Revised Gratuity of Rs. 15 Lakh, Revised Leave Encashment of Rs. 10 Lakh and Revised Commuted Pension to the petitioner alongwith interest till day. The petitioner further submits that since the benefits have accrued to him, on passing of the Notification, revising the scale in January 2022, the petitioner is entitled to interest on delayed payments.

¶15

¶16

Learned Counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance upon the judgment passed by this Curt in

¶17

CWP No. 3050 of 2014, titled as Nek Ram vs. State of H.P. & Ors , whereby this Court has directed the respondents to release the retiral benefits as mandated in the said judgment. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further placed reliance upon the judgment passed by Division Bench of this Court in CWP No. 2108 of 2023, titled as Bhagat Ram vs. Himachal Road Transport Corporation and Others, decided on 31.05.2023 (Copy supplied and taken on record) has directed the Respondent-Corporation to release the retiral benefits, alongwith interest @ 6% per annum from the due date till the realization of the benefits. The operative part of the judgment passed by Division Bench in case of Bhagat Ram (supra) reads as under:-

¶18

“6. Having regard to the reasons assigned in the said order and since the case of the petitioner in the instant case is also on the similar footing, the instant writ petition is also allowed by directing the respondents to pay arrears of pay as per the revision of the pay scales w.e.f. 01.01.2016 to 30.11.2020 with interest @ 6% per annum from the due

¶19

¶20

date till the date of its realization as per Annexure P-2. A further direction is also issued to the respondents to revise the pension, gratuity (DCRG) and leave encashment, as per Annexure P-2 and to pay the same alongwith interest @ 6% per annum to the petitioner w.e.f. the due date i.e. 01.12.2020, till the date of its realization. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stand disposed of accordingly.”

¶21

Mr. Vinod Gupta, learned counsel for the respondent vehemently opposes the claim on the ground that the petitioner has filed the writ petition without approaching the respondents, as the admissibility of revised retiral benefits and interest thereon requires certain particulars to be furnished by the petitioner. He further submits that the judgment in the case of Bhagat Ram (supra) has not been attained finality as the Corporation has filed a review petition which is pending listing/hearing before this Court.

¶22

Faced with this situation, Learned Counsel for the petitioner fairly submits that he may be permitted to make fresh representation in continuation of the earlier representation dated 16.6.2023, Annexure P-3, within 10 days from today. In case such representation is made,

¶23

¶24

this Court, directs respondent No.1-Managing Director of Himachal Road Transport Corporation to decide the representation in accordance with law and in light of the mandate passed by this Court in case of Bhagat Ram (supra) and to release the retiral benefits with interest @ 6% per annum within aforesaid period.

¶25

Needless to say that, this Court has not adverted to the merits of the matter and all Questions of facts and law are left open.

¶26

As aforesaid, the instant writ petition as well as, pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of, accordingly.

¶27

(Ranjan Sharma) Judge

¶28

November 7, 2023

¶29

(himani)

Kuldeep Singh v. the Hrtc and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kuldeep Singh v. the Hrtc and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vinay Kumar Sharma Vs State of Hp and Others

Suresh Chand and Others Vs State of Hp and Others

Rajinder Singh Thakur Vs State of Hp and Others

Meli Ram Vs State of Hp and Others

Lakshmi Devi Vs Anil Khachi

Susheel Kumar Vs Abhishek Jain and Others