Joint Director Of Civil Aviation & ... vs Sh.Iqbal Singh Vedi & Ors.
2011 Latest Caselaw 696 Del

*              IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+                          W.P. (Civil) No.7595 of 2010

%                          Date of Decision: 07.02.2011

Joint Director of Civil Aviation & Ors.                    ...... Petitioners

                       Through   Mr.V.K.Rao, Sr.Advocate with Mr.Ayushya
                                 Kumar & Mr.Vaibhav Kalra, Advocates.

                                   Versus

Sh.Iqbal Singh Vedi & Ors.                                ...... Respondents

                       Through   Mr.M.K.Bhardwaj, Advocate

CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE VEENA BIRBAL

1.    Whether reporters of Local papers may be                 YES
      allowed to see the judgment?
2.    To be referred to the reporter or not?                    NO
3.    Whether the judgment should be reported in                NO
      the Digest?

ANIL KUMAR, J.

*

1. The petitioners, Joint Director of Civil Aviation & Ors., have

challenged the order dated 19th May, 2010 passed in CP No.236 of 2007

in OA No.1640 of 2006 by the Central Administrative Tribunal,

Principal Bench, New Delhi in the matter, titled „Iqbal Singh Vedi & Ors.

v. Sh. A.K.Chopra, Joint Director of Civil Aviation & Ors.‟ where the

Tribunal heard revived contempt petition and directed the petitioners to

pay to the respondents simple interest @ 9% per annum on arrears of

revision of IDA pay scale from December, 1990 till December, 1995

within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of the

order.

2. The Tribunal had held that it had directed by an order dated 4th

June, 2007 in OA No.1640 of 2006 to grant interest at 9% per annum

on the arrears payable to the respondents from the date it became due

till the date of payment. It was further held that the petitioners had

adopted the revision of IDA pay scale w.e.f. 01.01.1990 by a decision

taken on 01.01.1996 and since it was ordered that arrears be payable

from the date payment became due, therefore, interest on arrears from

December, 1990 till December, 1995 shall also be payable which has

been denied to the respondents.

3. The plea of the petitioners was that though the arrears on the

revision of pay scale has been granted w.e.f. 01.01.1990 yet interest has

been made applicable only from 01.01.1996 i.e. from the date the

revision had been adopted by the petitioners.

4. The Tribunal categorically noted that the directions in para 26 (c)

of the order passed on the OA was to pay interest to the respondents

from the date it became due and till the date of payment‟. The plea of

the petitioners that the payment of interest from 01.01.1990 would

open the flood gate and administrative chaotic situation was not

accepted and consequently, directed the compliance of the order dated

4th June, 2007 and to pay interest for the period December, 1990 till

December, 1995.

5. The order of the Tribunal dated 19th May, 2010 is primarily

challenged on the ground that the Tribunal has misinterpreted its own

directions given by the order dated 4th June, 2007 and further

directions to pay interest from December, 1990 till December, 1995

were uncalled for and legally not required to be passed. It was also

contended that the directions in the contempt petition may result in

multiplicity of litigation. The petitioners also pleaded that the Tribunal

has exceeded its jurisdiction while issuing these directions in the

contempt petition as the petitioners had already complied with the

directions given by the Tribunal in the order dated 4th June, 2007 while

disposing of OA No.1640 of 2006 of the respondents.

6. The respondent no.1 and the counsel for the respondent nos. 2 &

3 have opposed the pleas of the petitioners and have contended that the

order dated 4th June, 2007 is clear and unambiguous. Against the said

order a writ petition was filed by the petitioners where the order was not

stayed. In the said writ petition being WP(C) 5687 of 2007 the

petitioners were directed to pay all the arrears and the respondents

were directed to secure the amount payable by the petitioners. The plea

of the petitioners that the Tribunal has antedated the relief in exercise

of its contempt jurisdiction was denied on the ground that while

allowing the original application of the respondents the interest had

been awarded from the date the arrears had become due.

7. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have also

perused the record. The record of the Civil Writ Petition No.5687 of

2007 has also been called which was filed on behalf of the petitioners

against the order dated 4th June, 2007 passed by the Central

Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi in the matter

„Sh.Iqbal Singh Vedi & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors.‟, allowing the OA of

the respondents.

8. The respondents in OA No.1640 of 2006 had sought the

directions to the petitioners to fix their pension strictly in accordance

with CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972 and to pay all the amounts due to them

along with interest. The reliefs claimed by the petitioners in their OA

being OA No.1640 of 2006, were as under:-

"8.1 That the Hon‟ble Tribunal may be graciously pleased to allow this application and direct the Respondents to extend the benefit of the judgment of this Hon‟ble Tribunal upheld by the Hon‟ble High Court of Delhi and also direct the Respondents to recompute the pensionary benefits of the Applicants as per the C.C.S (Pension) Rules.

8.2 That the Hon‟ble Tribunal may be further graciously pleased to direct the Respondents to revise the pensionary benefits so fixed once again with effect from 01.01.1996 as per the Fifth Pay Commission recommendations.

8.3 That the Hon‟ble Tribunal may be further graciously pleased to pay interest at the rate of 9% p.a on the arrears from the date of the amounts due till the date of actual

payment, as has been decided by the Hon‟ble High Court of Delhi.

8.4 That the Hon‟ble Tribunal may be further graciously pleased to grant any other or further relief which it deem fit and proper on the facts and in the circumstances of the case.

8.5 That the Hon‟ble Tribunal may be further graciously pleased to award exemplary costs against the Respondents in favour of the Applicants."

9. The Tribunal while allowing the OA of the respondents had

granted the following reliefs:-

"26. In the light of the foregoing discussion and after a careful consideration of the entire conspectus of the case, the O.A is allowed with the following directions:-

a) The three PPOs dated 30.10.2006 are quashed and set aside.

b) Respondents are directed to revise/refix the pension of the applicants strictly in accordance with the options exercised by them and in accordance with the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972 as well as the terms and conditions of the Vth CPC.

c) 9% interest on arrears payable to the applicants from the date it became due and till the date of payment.

d) Applicants be compensated by payment of Rs.10,000/- each by the respondents.

e) The above directions are to be complied with within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order."

10. From the above, it is apparent that the Tribunal had granted 9%

interest on arrears payable to the applicants from the date it became

due till the date of payment.

11. Aggrieved by the order of the Tribunal granting the above noted

reliefs, the petitioners have filed a writ petition being W.P.(C) No.5687 of

2007, titled „Director General Civil Aviation v. Iqbal Singh Vedi‟ in which

matter Rule D.B. was issued on 21st July, 2008.

12. In the said writ petition, on behalf of the respondents reliance

was placed on an order passed in a similar writ petition being No.4073

of 2007 in which the petitioners were directed to implement the order

passed by the Tribunal subject to employees‟ undertaking that in the

event of the matter going against the employees, the excess amount if

any, paid to them shall be recovered from their pension.

13. On behalf of the respondents, it was contended on 13th

December, 2007 in W.P.(C) No.5687 of 2007, titled „Director General

Civil Aviation v. Iqbal Singh Vedi‟ that the respondents are ready to give

undertaking that in the event of matter going against them, the excess

amount, if any, paid to them shall be recovered from their pension. In

the circumstances Court by order dated 13th December, 2007, in

W.P.(C) No.5687 of 2007 had directed the petitioners to implement the

directions issued by the Tribunal subject to respondents filing

undertaking before the Court to the agreed terms and conditions.

14. The petitioners had also filed an application being CM No.10558

of 2007 in W.P.(C) No.5687 of 2007 for stay of the order dated 4th June,

2007 which was however, declined holding that the parties shall be

bound by the order dated 13th December, 2007.

15. Consequently, the petitioners became liable to pay the amounts

to the respondents in terms of order dated 4th June, 2007 which also

included 9% interest on arrears payable to the respondents from the

date it became due till the date of payment.

16. This cannot be disputed by the petitioners that the arrears

became due to the respondents from December, 1990. If the arrears

have became due from December, 1990 and the said order has not been

stayed and in any case, the amount of interest if paid from the

December, 1990 till December, 1995 will be in excess of the amount

payable to the respondents, rights of the petitioners have been

protected and therefore, the petitioners cannot have any grievance

about it.

17. The plea of the learned counsel for the petitioners that the

Tribunal has antedated data where from revised pension was to be paid

is also not born from the record. The claim of the respondent in the OA

No.1640 of 2006 was for revision of pension w.e.f. 1990 as they stood

retired by then and the pay scales were revised by petitioner vide letter

dated 05.03.1999 with retrospective effect i.e. w.e.f 02.10.1989 and

further revision w.e.f. 01.01.1996 as per 5th Pay Commission

recommendation. The same is allowed by the Tribunal vide judgment

dated 04.06.2007. The Tribunal rather decided that interest at 9% p.a.

is payable from the date the amounts become due till the date of

payment. This finding of the Tribunal in its order dated 4th June, 2007

was not challenged by the petitioners in the writ petition being WP(C)

5687 of 2007 filled by the petitioners. In the circumstances, by no

stretch of arguments, it can be held that the Tribunal has antedated

data while disposing of the contempt petition. Against the order of the

Tribunal granting interest from the date the arrears have become due

the petitioners have filed a writ petition in which the original order

dated 4th June, 2007 has not been stayed. In the circumstances in the

contempt petition if the Tribunal has directed the petitioners to pay the

interest from the date arrears have become due, the petitioners cannot

be allowed to contend that the Tribunal has antedated the data or in

exercise of its contempt jurisdiction has modified or altered the original

order which was sought to be implemented.

18. In the circumstances, it cannot be held that the petitioners are

not liable to pay interest at 9% per annum from December, 1990 till

December, 1995 subject to the undertaking given in W.P.(C) No.5687 of

2007, nor it can be held that the order of the Tribunal suffers from any

such illegality, or perversity which shall require any interference by this

Court in exercise of its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution

of India. The writ petition in the facts and circumstances, is without

any merit. It is therefore, dismissed. The parties are however, left to

bear their own costs.

ANIL KUMAR, J.

February 07, 2011. VEENA BIRBAL, J.

„vk‟