Sadiq Ali v. Hrtc and Others

Himachal Pradesh HC21 May 2025CWP/8274/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Retiral benefits; gratuity; arrears of pension; leave encashment; delay in payment of dues; interest 9% per annum beyond six months; six-month payment window; HRTC; Himachal Road Transport Corporation; Payment of Gratuity Act; Sadiq Ali v. HRTC; CWP No. 8274/2025; High Court of Himachal Pradesh; Jyotsna Rewal Dua; Nek Ram v. State of HP CWP 3050/2014; Subhash Chand v. HRTC CWP 4377/2021; Ram Lal v. HPTDC CWP 6034/2021; Review Petition 110/2021.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the respondents to pay the petitioner's remaining retiral benefits with actual rate of interest as per applicable rules within six months; if delayed beyond six months, interest at 9% per annum till the date of actual payment. ¶¶13

Sadiq Ali Vs Hrtc and Others — Himachal Pradesh HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶¶13

Issue for consideration

Whether the respondents (HRTC) are liable to pay the petitioner his remaining retiral benefits along with interest for the delay attributable to the respondents.

¶¶3

Court's answer

Writ petition disposed of with a direction to the respondents to pay the petitioner's remaining retiral benefits with actual rate of interest as per applicable rules till actual payment, within six months.

¶¶13

Ratio / Principle

If payment of the due amount is delayed beyond six months, it shall be paid with interest at the rate of 9% per annum till the date of actual payment.

¶¶13

Key takeaways

Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.ratio¶¶13

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Himachal Pradesh, Shimla (Jyotsna Rewal Dua, J), CWP No. 8274/2025, Sadiq Ali v. HRTC & others, decided 21.05.2025 — Retired HRTC employee's writ petition seeking remaining retiral benefits with interest for delay disposed of with direction to respondents to pay the dues with actual rate of interest as per applicable rules within six months; if delayed beyond six months, interest at 9% per annum till actual payment; pending miscellaneous applications disposed of. Direction framed in view of the Court's earlier orders: Nek Ram v. State of HP (CWP 3050/2014); Subhash Chand v. HRTC (CWP 4377/2021, order dated 25.08.2021, clarified in Review Petition 110/2021 to cover entire retiral dues including gratuity, arrears of pension and leave encashment with prescribed rate of interest within six months from due date); and Ram Lal v. HPTDC (CWP 6034/2021, gratuity within six months, failing which differential between statutorily payable interest per the Payment of Gratuity Act and 9% per annum for the delay beyond six months).

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

¶2

CWP No. 8274/2025 Decided on: 21.05.2025 Sadiq Ali …Petitioner Versus HRTC & others .…Respondents. ……………………………………………………………………………. Coram The Hon’ble Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?¹ For the petitioners: Mr. Mandeep Chandel, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Rahul Thakur, Advocate. Jyotsna Rewal Dua , J

¶3

The writ petition has been filed by the petitioner, who had retired from the service of the respondents–Himachal Road Transport Corporation (HRTC), with the prayer that the respondents may be directed to pay the remaining retiral benefits to the petitioner alongwith interest for the delay on part of the respondents.

¶4

Reliance has been placed on the judgment passed by a Division Bench of this Court in CWP No. 3050 of 2014 , titled Nek Ram versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others, decided on 17.07.2014 and also on a subsequent order of this Court dated 25.08.2021, passed in CWP No. 4377 of 2021, titled Sh. Subhash

¶5

1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?yes

¶6

¶7

Chand versus The Himachal Road Transport Corporation,

¶8

Shimla and others alongwith connected matters, in which, the respondents were directed to pay the retiral benefits to the petitioners within a period of six months. In case, the required retiral benefits are not paid to the petitioners within the aforesaid period of six months, then in addition to the due statutory benefits, the petitioners shall also be paid interest at the rate of 9% per annum beyond the period of six months till the date of actual payment.

¶9

In another subsequent order of this Court passed in CWP No. 6034 of 2021 , titled Ram Lal versus The Himachal Pradesh Tourism Development Corporation Ltd. and another and the connected matter, decided on 23.11.2021, the respondents were directed to make payment of gratuity to the petitioners within a period of six months from the date of passing the order. In the event of non-payment of due amount, the petitioners were held entitled to differential amount of interest between the amount of interest statutorily payable to the petitioners as per the Payment of Gratuity Act and the interest at the rate of 9% per annum for the period of delay beyond six months.

¶10

4. While disposing of Review Petition No.110 of 2021 on 25.11.2021, preferred against the order dated 09.11.2021 passed in CWP No.6928 of 2021, in which, the aforesaid order dated 25.08.2021 passed in CWP No.4377 of 2021 was relied upon, this

¶11

¶12

Court has clarified the aforesaid order in the terms that the respondent-Corporation shall be liable to pay entire retiral dues of the petitioner, including gratuity, arrears of pension and leave encashment alongwith prescribed rate of interest, within a period of six months from the due date till the actual payment is made.

¶13

5. In view of above, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to pay the amount of remaining retiral benefits to the petitioner with actual rate of interest as per applicable rules, till the time of actual payment, which shall be paid to him within a period of six months from today. The due amount of payment, if delayed beyond six months, shall be paid with interest to the rate of 9% per annum till the date of its actual payment. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.

¶14

Jyotsna Rewal Dua Judge

¶15

21^st May, 2025 (rohit)

Sadiq Ali v. Hrtc and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sadiq Ali v. Hrtc and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Indira Devi Vs Director of Higher Education and Others

Akhilesh Kumar and Others Vs the State of Hp and Others

Rakesh Sharma Vs the State of Hp and Others

Dev Raj Vs the State of Hp and Others

Satish Singh and Ors. Vs State of Hp and Anr.

Bishan Dev Vs the State of Hp and Others