Ramdhari Yadav And 3 Others vs Union Of India And 2 Others
2025 Latest Caselaw 3301 ALL

Allahabad High Court

Ramdhari Yadav And 3 Others vs Union Of India And 2 Others on 4 August, 2025

Author: Saurabh Shyam Shamshery

Bench: Saurabh Shyam Shamshery

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 


?Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:130613
 
Court No. - 5
 

 
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 7907 of 2025
 

 
Petitioner :- Ramdhari Yadav And 3 Others
 
Respondent :- Union Of India And 2 Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Anil Kumar,Brij Narayan
 
Counsel for Respondent :- A.S.G.I.,Dinesh Kumar Rai,Sudarshan Singh
 

 
Hon'ble Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J.
 

1. Heard Sri Anil Kumar, learned counsel for petitioners, Sri Dinesh Kumar Rai, learned counsel for respondent Nos.2 and 3 and Sri Sudarshan Singh, learned counsel for respondent No.1.

2. The petitioners are fence sitter. They have approached this Court after the law was crystalized so far as entitlement to the benefit of leave encashment and interest thereupon for delay in payment and undisputedly, petitioners (4 in number) have retired in between 2015-2016.

3. Learned counsel for petitioners refers some judgments passed by co-ordinate Bench of this Court that even at later stage, relief was granted so much as that matter was remitted to concerned respondent to decide in the light of judgments passed by the Supreme Court in Special Leave to Appeal (c) No.7939 of 2024 (I.T.I. Ltd. and another Vs. Ashok Kumar Shukla and another) as well as this Court in (Rama Kant Srivastava Vs. Indian Telephone Industries Limited and 2 others) Writ-A No. 31385 of 2016 in regard to payment of interest.

4. Learned counsel for respondent Nos.2 and 3 submits that leave encashment have already been paid to petitioners way back in the year 2020 and 2021 and only issue left is of interest on delayed payment and for that they have approached this Court after five years.

5. I have considered the above submission and perused the record. The petitioners were paid leave encashment on basis of judgment passed by this Court. It appears that issue of interest was not earlier raise and now it is raised on a ground that in some cases, interest was paid.

6. The Court takes reference of Rajesh Kumar Patel Vs. Indian Telephone Industries and others, 2024:AHC:197559, wherein after considering the judgments passed by Supreme Court an order was passed to pay interest even at belated stage.

7. In the aforesaid circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of with an observation/direction that in case, petitioners approach concerned respondent so far as issue of payment of interest is concerned, the concerned respondent will take note of judgment referred above and will pass a reasoned order.

Order Date :- 4.8.2025

N. Sinha