In this CWP, the petitioner sought interest on salary arrears granted under an IDA scheme. The court held that the retrospective grant was a policy benefit to employees who had not previously opted for it, thus the delay was not culpable.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
CWP No. 1419 of 2011 [1]
IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH
C.W. P. No. 1419 of 2011 (O&M)
Date of decision : 27.7.2012
Manjinder Singh
.. Petitioner
versus
Food Corporation of India and others
.. Respondents.
Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal
Present: Ms. Bhupinder Kaur, Advocate for Mr. Harinder Sharma, Advocate the petitioner.
Mr. R. K. Sharma, Advocate for the respondents.
Rajesh Bindal, J.
In the present petition, prayer made by the petitioner is that he should be granted selection grade w.e.f. 1.12.1992 on Industrial Dearness Allowance (for short, 'IDA') pattern.
Learned counsel for the respondents submitted that at the relevant time the petitioner was to opt for payment of salary under the aforesaid scheme, as the petitioner was earlier governed under CDA pattern of pay. He had not opted at that time. Subsequently, the employees started raising grievance considering the fact that the pay under IDA pattern was more. The respondent-Corporation, as a policy matter, decided to give benefit to its employees. In terms thereof, pay of the petitioner has been refixed from 1.8.1983 onwards. The arrears were determined at 7,30,683/and after reducing the income-tax and certain amounts on account of vigilance recoveries etc., a sum of 6,01,121/- was paid to the petitioner in March, 2012.
CWP No. 1419 of 2011 [2]
The fact that the amount has been received by the petitioner is not disputed by learned counsel for the petitioner. However, she submitted that on account of delay, the petitioner is entitled to payment of interest.
Considering the fact that the stand of the respondents is that at the relevant time, the petitioner had not opted for getting pay under IDA pattern and it was subsequently decided by the respondent-Corporation as a policy to grant pay to its employees under IDA pattern and the petitioner has been given the benefit. The delay was only on that account.
Considering the aforesaid facts, I do not find that the claim made by the petitioner for grant of interest is justifiable.
Accordingly, the petition is dismissed.
( Rajesh Bindal ) Judge
27.7.2012 mk
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to interest on salary arrears granted under an IDA pattern scheme.
Whether a grant of pay under a benefit policy excuses delay in payment for interest claims.
Manjinder Singh
Food Corporation of India and others
Rajesh Bindal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
