Himachal Pradesh High Court
Between vs State Of Himachal Pradesh And on 6 December, 2021
Bench: Sabina, Jyotsna Rewal Dua
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
ON THE 6th DAY OF DECEMBER, 2021
BEFORE
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SABINA
.
&
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTSNA REWAL DUA
CIVIL WRIT PETITION No.6855 of 2021
Between:-
SOM PRABHA
W/O LATE SH. GAMBHIR SINGH,
R/O VILLAGE KARSHOLI, PO NARAIN,
TEHSIL RAMPUR, DISTT. SHIMLA, H.P.
......PETITIONER
(BY SH. OM PARKASH GOEL, ADVOCATE)
AND
1. THE HIMACHAL PRADESH TOURISM
DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD.
THROUGH ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR,
RITZ ANNEXE, SHIMLA-171001
2. SENIOR ACCOUNTS OFFICER,
HPTDC, RITZ ANNEXE, SHIMLA-171001
......RESPONDENTS
(BY SH. NARESH KAUL, ADVOCATE)
This petition coming on for admission this day,
Hon'ble Ms. Justice Sabina, passed the following:
ORDER
This petition has been filed by petitioner Som Prabha,
who retired from services of the Himachal Pradesh Tourism
Development Corporation Ltd. on 31.05.2020. According to the
petitioner, she was entitled to payment of gratuity to the tune of
Rs.5,03,058/- and leave encashment of Rs.3,58,476/-, which were
sanctioned to him by the respondents vide order dated 02.09.2020.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied on the
judgment dated 17th July, 2014, passed by this Court in CWP
.
No.3050 of 2014, titled Nek Ram vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and
others and submits that the respondents should be directed to pay
the retiral benefits together with interest at the rate of 9% per annum
from the due date.
3. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents
has submitted that the judgment passed in Nek Ram case (supra)
pertains to the retired employee of Himachal Pradesh Road
Transport Corporation. He has also cited order passed by this Court
on 23.11.2021 in CWP No.6034 of 2021, titled Ram Lal vs. The
Himachal Pradesh Tourism Development Corporation Ltd. &
another, pertaining to retired employee of Himachal Pradesh
Tourism Development Corporation Ltd. He submitted that so far as
the gratuity is concerned, it always carries statutory interest
alongwith interest till the time of actual payment and therefore, there
is no question of any separate order for payment of interest being
passed. Even then, this Court taking into consideration the huge
financial difficulty, being faced by the respondent-Corporation
granted the period of six months for payment of all other retiral
benefits/dues with the stipulation that if the same is not paid within
that period, it shall be paid alongwith interest at the rate of 9% per
annum beyond the period of six months till actual payment.
4. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties,
perusing the aforesaid orders passed by this Court and considering
.
the fact that gratuity and leave encashment are still to be paid to the
petitioner and statutory interest is always payable to the petitioner
on the amount of gratuity till the actual payment is made, we deem it
appropriate to direct the respondents to make payment of gratuity
and leave encashment to the petitioner within a period of six months
from today. For gratuity, the petitioner shall be entitled to differential
amount of interest between the amount of interest statutorily payable
to the petitioner as per the Payment of Gratuity Act and the interest
of 9% per annum for the period of delay beyond six months.
Payment of leave encashment beyond six months shall carry 9%
interest per annum.
The writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms.
Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.
( Sabina )
Judge
( Jyotsna Rewal Dua )
December 06, 2021 Judge
Mukesh
