Braj Kumar vs Union Of India And 4 Others
2025 Latest Caselaw 10737 ALL

Allahabad High Court

Braj Kumar vs Union Of India And 4 Others on 17 September, 2025

Author: Saurabh Shyam Shamshery

Bench: Saurabh Shyam Shamshery

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 


Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:165975
 

 
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD 
 
WRIT - A No. - 14044 of 2025   
 
   Braj Kumar    
 
  .....Petitioner(s)   
 
 Versus  
 
   Union Of India And 4 Others    
 
  .....Respondent(s)       
 
   
 
  
 
Counsel for Petitioner(s)   
 
:   
 
Brijesh Kumar Mishra   
 
  
 
Counsel for Respondent(s)   
 
:   
 
A.S.G.I., Dinesh Kumar Rai   
 
     
 
 Court No. - 5
 
   
 
 HON'BLE SAURABH SHYAM SHAMSHERY, J.     

1. Heard Sri Brijesh Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for petitioner and Sri Dinesh Kumar Rai as well as Sri Sudarshan Singh, Advocates for respondents.

2. The petitioner is a fence sitter. He has 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, petitioner has retired on 31.07.2012.

3. Learned counsel for petitioner refers some judgments passed by a 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 respondents submits that leave encashment have already been paid to petitioner way back in the year 2019 and only issue left is of interest on delayed payment and for that he has approached this Court after six years.

5. I have considered the above submission and perused the record. The petitioner was 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, petitioner approaches 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.

(Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J.)

September 17, 2025

AK