Allowed

Raj Kumari etc. v. State of Haryana etc.

Punjab & Haryana HC16 Dec 2011CWP/12865/1993

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition, the court directed the State of Haryana, cooperating with the Haryana Social Welfare Advisory Board and the Indian Red Cross Society, to pay unpaid salaries for two years within three months. The judgment also awarded interest on the delayed amounts.

What did the court decide?

Direct respondents to make over unpaid salaries within three months; award 6% interest initially, escalating to 12% per annum thereafter.

Raj Kumari etc. Vs State of Haryana… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Punjab & Haryana HC (2011)

¶1

CWP No.12865 of 1993

¶2

-1-

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

CWP No.12865 of 1993 Date of decision: 16.12.2011.

¶5

Smt. Raj Kumari and others

¶6

... Petitioners

¶7

versus

¶8

Haryana Social Welfare Advisory Board, Chandigarh through its Secretary and another

¶9

... Respondents

¶10

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV NARAIN RAINA

¶11

Present: Mr. Hari Om Sharma, Advocate for the petitioners.

¶12

Mr. S.S. Goripuria, DAG, Haryana.

¶13

¶14

To be referred to the reporter or not?

¶15

Whether the judgment should be reported in the digest?

¶16

RAJIV NARAIN RAINA, J. (Oral):

¶17

Mr. Hari Om Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioners states that the claim in the petition at this stage is restricted to unpaid salaries to the petitioners for the period April 1993 to September 1993 when the Mahila Mandal Programme was closed following the Central Government's directive not to grant funds for the continuance of the scheme for the period 1993-94 onwards. He has brought to my notice the averments made in para No.13 of the written statement filed by respondent No.2 i.e. Indian Red Cross Society, District Branch, Hisar, where there is an admission in the following terms:-

¶18

"In reply to para 13, it is submitted that writ jurisdiction cannot be invoked for regulating the proceedings. In any case, the answering respondent is taking active steps to issue checks (sic. cheques) in lieu of salary. Earlier the grant was not received from respondent No.1, hence the

¶19

CWP No.12865 of 1993

¶20

-2-

¶21

salary could not be paid hereinfore."

¶22

Learned counsel for the petitioners has produced affidavits of the petitioners all dated 16.08.2011 in Court, which are taken on record as Mark 'X', stating that they have not received salary for the aforesaid period. This fact has not been denied before me that the salaries of the petitioners still remained outstanding for the said period before their services were brought to an end. There is yet another admission in the reply filed by the Red Cross Society in Civil Misc. No.15361 of 1995 that " the Budget for the year 1993-94 has not yet been received from the Advisory Board, Chandigarh, as such the salary for the remaining period from April 1993 till September 1993 cannot be paid. The answering respondent is making all efforts to procure the funds from the Board so that salary to the employees can be paid."

¶23

Heard Mr. Hari Om Sharma, Advocate for the petitioners and Mr. S.S. Goripuria, learned DAG, Haryana on the issue pressed.

¶24

None has appeared on behalf of respondent No.2. However, in view of the admissions of respondent No.2, as stated above, and the fact that the scheme was sponsored by the Central Government and operated through the Haryana Social Welfare Advisory Board, Chandigarh and respondent No.2, I feel that a direction deserves to be issued to the respondents to make over the unpaid salaries to the petitioners within three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.

¶25

The principal liability squarely rests on the Haryana Social Welfare Advisory Board, Chandigarh and the Indian Red Cross Society, Hisar. It is, therefore, directed that the State of Haryana will make over the payments within the aforesaid period in the first instance and then recover the same from the Board-respondent No.1 and respondent No.2.

¶26

Mr. Hari Om Sharma, Advocate contends that the Government has illegally withheld payment since 1993 for no just cause or legal

¶27

CWP No.12865 of 1993 -3-

¶28

justification even after admitting it to be due and payable and that therefore, some interest should be awarded to the petitioners on the outstanding amounts. I accept the said prayer and award 6% simple interest on the amounts. After expiry of the period of 03 months interest would run at the rate of 12% per annum till payment.

¶29

Disposed of as above.

¶30

16.12.2011 Jyoti 1

¶31

(RAJIV NARAIN RAINA) JUDGE

Raj Kumari etc. v. State of Haryana etc.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raj Kumari etc. v. State of Haryana etc.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Tej Singh and Anr. Vs Faridabad Central Cooperative Bank Ltd. and Ors.

Jatinder Singh and Anr. Vs State of Punjab and Anr.

Sumitra Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

Gaj Raj Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

The Haldari Coop. Credit and Service Society Ltd. Vs Rameshwar and Anr.

Ravinder Paul Vs State of Punjab and Others