Allahabad High Court
I.T.I. Limited Thru Chairman vs State Of U.P. Thru Prin. Secy. ... on 15 May, 2023
Bench: Vivek Chaudhary, Manish Kumar
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC-LKO:33406-DB
Court No. - 3
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 8733 of 2007
Petitioner :- I.T.I. Limited Thru Chairman
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru Prin. Secy. Finance And Anr.
Counsel for Petitioner :- Dwijendra Mishra,Vikas Singh
Counsel for Respondent :- C.Sc.,Gaurav Mehrotra,Sarvesh Kumar Dubey,Siddharth Dhaon
Hon'ble Vivek Chaudhary,J.
Hon'ble Manish Kumar,J.
Heard learned learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
Admittedly, the similar matter has already been decided by co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Misc. Behcn No.1759 of 2011 (The Central Board of Trustees Employees Provident vs. The Pradeshya Industrial and Investment Corporation of U.P.), which is quoted as under:
"Heard Sri Shailendra Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Advocate General assisted by Sri Pankaj Srivastava, learned counsel appearing for State-respondent and Sri Survesh Kumar Dubey, holding brief of Sri Vivek Raj Singh, learned counsel for respondent no.1-Pradeshya Industrial and Investment Corporation (PICUP).
Pursuant to the interim order, principal amount has already been paid to the petitioner. In relation to payment of interest, learned Advocate General has drawn attention of this Court to certain directions issued by Hon'ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No.1467 of 2018, which was filed by PICUP against the judgment of this Court in the writ petition filed by Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd concerning the same bonds. The operative portion of the said judgment is as follows:-
"6. Having regard to the submissions made by the learned counsel on both sides, we are of the view that as in the case of State Vs. Hindustan Unilevers (supra), this is also a fit case where this Court should invoke its discretion under Article 142 of the Constitution of India to do complete justice between the parties and to put an end to the entire litigations. Accordingly, in the peculiar facts of these cases, these appeals are disposed of as follows :-
i) The respondents shall be entitled to the contractual rate of interest as per the bonds, till the principal amounts were repaid.
ii) From that date, the respondents shall be paid interest at the rate of 11%.
iii) The payment shall be made positively within a period of three months from today.
iv) In case the payments are not made within the stipulated period, the respondents shall be entitled to interest at the rate of 18% and the officer(s) responsible for the delay will be personally liable for the same".
Learned Advocate General has stated that scheme for payment of interest as provided in judgment and order dated 01.02.2018 passed by Hon'ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No.1467 of 2018; Pradeshiya Industrial Development Corporation Ltd. U.P. vs. Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd. and others, shall be followed in the instant case as well.
Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner does not have any objection to the same.
Accordingly, this petition is disposed of in terms of the scheme framed by Hon'ble Supreme Court for payment of interest in its judgment and order dated 01.02.2018 passed in Civil Appeal No.1467 of 2018.
We make it clear that directions contained in the judgment and order dated 01.02.2018 passed by Hon'ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No. 1467 of 2018 shall strictly be complied with for which learned Advocate General has extended his assurance that in this case also the payment of interest shall be made to the petitioner within a period of three months from today. "
The present writ petition is disposed of in terms of judgement quoted hereinabove. Since the State has not given undertaking in this case for payment, a direction is issued that the entire amount shall be paid within three months.
Order Date :- 15.5.2023
S. Kumar
