Allahabad High Court
Pashupatinath Ojha vs U.P. Jal Nigam (Urban) Lko. Thru. ... on 14 December, 2022
Bench: Rajnish Kumar
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 5
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 8396 of 2022
Petitioner :- Pashupatinath Ojha
Respondent :- U.P. Jal Nigam (Urban) Lko. Thru. Chairman And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Prem Shanker Shukla,Mool Shankar Mishra
Counsel for Respondent :- Rishabh Kapoor
Hon'ble Rajnish Kumar,J.
Heard Sri Prem Shankar Shukla, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Rishabh Kapoor, learned counsel for the respondents.
This writ petition has been filed for a direction to release the remaining interest accruing upon the delayed payment of gratuity and leave encashment amount in favour of the petitioner, as directed by this Court in Writ petition Service Single No.3853 of 2021 as per government order dated 30.11.1984, contained in Annexure No.7 to the writ petition. Further prayer has been made for a direction to pay the penal interest to the petitioner at the rate of 5% over the entire retiral amount from 10.05.2022 upto date of actual payment.
A preliminary objection has been raised by Sri Rishabh Kapoor, learned counsel for the respondents that the petitioner has earlier approached this Court by means of Writ petition Service Single No.3853 of 2021(Pashupati Nath Ojha versus U.P. Jal Nigam and others). The said writ petition was disposed of by means of the order dated 10.02.2021 with direction to make payment of gratuity and leave encashment to the petitioner alongwith admissible interest strictly in accordance with law, if there is no legal impediment. It was further provided that if the retiral benefits are not paid within the aforesaid stipulated time, the petitioner may also be entitled for penal interest. In compliance thereof, the payment has been made to the petitioner. Thereafter the petitioner preferred a contempt petition, which has also been dismissed with liberty to the applicant to make a representation in regard to the difference in computation. Therefore the submission is that once the relief claimed in this writ petition has not been claimed in the earlier writ petition and even after claiming has been abandoned in the earlier writ petition, the petitioner is not entitled for filing the second writ petition. He relies on a judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sarguja Transport Service versus State Transport Appellate Tribunal, M.P. Gwalior and others; (1987) 1 SCC 5.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in case of delay, penal interest was awarded by this Court by means of the order dated 10.02.2021 passed in Writ petition Service Single No.3853 of 2021 but the admissible interest as per the Government Order dated 30.11.1984 has not been paid to the petitioner. Therefore the petitioner is entitled for the same. Since as per the liberty granted by this Court in Contempt Petition, the petitioner has preferred a representation which has also not been disposed of, the petitioner has no other remedy except to approach this Court.
Having considered the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of record, it is apparent that this Court has disposed of the writ petition bearing No.3853 of 2021 filed by the petitioner by means of the order dated 10.02.2022 with a direction to make the payment of gratuity and leave encashment to the petitioner with admissible interest strictly in accordance with law, if there is no legal impediment and it was further provided that if the retiral benefits are not paid within the aforesaid stipulated time, the petitioner may also be entitled for penal interest.Therefore it is apparent that the relief claimed in this writ petition was either not claimed in the earlier writ petition or not granted by the Court. Therefore the petitioner cannot file fresh writ petition claiming the relief which has either not claimed or not granted in the earlier writ petition. The only course open to the petitioner is to take appropriate steps for compliance of the said order. In case the contempt petition has been dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to make representation with a direction for disposal of the said representation, the petitioner may avail the appropriate remedy if such compliance is not being made as may be available to him.
The writ petition is accordingly dismissed.
Order Date :- 14.12.2022
Akanksha
