Karnataka High Court
S Yathindra Kumar vs Hmt Ltd on 2 April, 2024
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:13491
WP No. 453 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF APRIL, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
WRIT PETITION NO.453 OF 2024 (S-RES)
BETWEEN:
1. S.YATHINDRA KUMAR
S/O LATE S.K.P NAIDU
AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS
R/AT NO.52-A, 9TH MAIN
4TH BLOCK, RAJAJINAGAR
BENGALURU - 560 010
2. SRI.D.N.SUKUMAR
S/O LATE D NARASAPPASETTY
AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS
R/AT NO.442, 16TH A MAIN ROAD
36TH CROSS, 4TH "T" BLOCK
JAYANAGAR
BENGALURU - 560 041
Digitally signed by
CHAITHRA A
3. SRI.J.M.SRINIVAS
Location: HIGH
S/O LATE H MUNISWAMAPPA
COURT OF
KARNATAKA AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS
R/AT NO.4/1, 34TH CROSS
JOOGANAHALLI, 2ND BLOCK
RAJAJINAGAR
BENGALURU - 560 010
(SENIOR CITIZEN BENEFIT IS NOT CLAIMED)
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI.SUBRAMANYA BHAT M, ADVOCATE)
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:13491
WP No. 453 of 2024
AND:
1. HMT LTD
(A GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
UNDERTAKING)
REPRESENTED BY CHAIRMAN AND
MANAGING DIRECTOR
HMT BHAVAN, NO.59
BELLARY ROAD
BENGALURU - 560 032
2. HMT MACHINE TOOLS LIMITED
(A GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
UNDERTAKING)
REPRESENTED BY THE
MANAGING DIRECTOR
HMT BHAVAN
NO.59, BELLARY ROAD
BENGALURU - 560 032
3. THE GENERAL MANAGER
HMT MACHINE TOOLS LIMITED
BANGALORE COMPLEX
JAHALHALLI
BENGALURU - 560 013
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.SHRIDHAR NARAYAN HEGDE, ADVOCATE)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECTING THE
RESPONDENTS TO PAY INTEREST AT THE RATE OF 10 PERCENT
P.A ON THE DELAYED SETTLEMENT OF EL ENCASHMENT
BENEFITS FROM THE DATE ON WHICH THE SAME FELL DUE TILL
THE DATE OF ACTUAL PAYMENT OF THE SAID BENEFITS TO
THEM AND ETC.
-3-
NC: 2024:KHC:13491
WP No. 453 of 2024
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING,
THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
The captioned writ petition is filed seeking
direction against respondents to pay interest at the rate of
10% on the delayed payment of earned leave encashment
benefits.
2. The said petition is seriously contested by the
respondents by filing statement of objection.
3. Heard learned counsel appearing for the
petitioners and learned counsel appearing for the
respondents. Perused the records.
4. Petitioners are aggrieved by denial of interest
on the delayed payment of earned leave encashment
benefits. Petitioners' grievance is that petitioners were
made to run around pillar to post. This is 8th round of
litigation. The respondents have deposited leave
encashment as well as gratuity amount only in contempt
NC: 2024:KHC:13491
proceedings. Though respondents have paid leave
encashment and gratuity, petitioner is denied of interest.
The petitioner claimed that leave encashment was
released after 11 years.
5. The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of
JAGDISH PRASAD SAINI VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN
AND OTHERS1 has held that earned leave encashment
would be a part of salary and the right accrued to an
employee cannot be denied. The Hon'ble Apex Court was
of the view that the encashment of leave would be a part
of terminal benefits.
6. On examining the records, I find some force in
the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing
for the petitioners.
7. The respondents pursuant to initiation of
contempt proceedings deposited an amount of
Rs.1,25,82,932/- together with accrued interest. This
2022 SCC Online 1298
NC: 2024:KHC:13491
amount was deposited pertaining to several employees.
After this Court dropped contempt proceedings, the
respondents have withdrawn amount. If deposit was made
in the contempt proceedings along with accrued interest
and the said amount was kept in FD in judicial deposit and
the interest was accrued on such deposits, the
respondents having withdrawn the amount, now cannot
deny interest. The action of respondents and their
conduct is found to be unreasonable and not justified. The
application filed by the respondents in contempt
proceeding is placed on record. It would be useful for this
Court to cull out the said application filed under Section
151 of CPC., which reads as under;
"For the reasons sworn to in the
accompanying affidavit, the respondents
respectfully pray that this Hon'ble Court be
pleased to order refund of the amount in deposit
in a sum of Rs.1,25,82,932/- (Rupees One Crore
Twenty Five Lakh Eighty Two Thousand Nine
Hundred Thirty Two Only) together with accrued
interest to the respondents/accused, in view of
NC: 2024:KHC:13491
the order dated 20.09.2019 passed by the
learned single Judge allowing Review Petition
Nos.538/2017 & 543-544/2017 in
W.P.Nos.45250/45252/2014 and Review
Petition Nos.547/2017 and 576-579/2017 in
W.P.Nos.27796-27800/2014, in the interest of
justice and equity."
8. On perusal of the above said paragraph, it
indicates that respondents have deposited amount with
accrued interest pursuant to order dated 20.09.2019
passed by the learned Single Judge while allowing the
Review Petition No.538/2017.
9. If these significant details are taken into
consideration, this Court is of the view that the
respondents cannot deny the interest on the ground that
the respondents company is declared as sick company.
Reliance placed on the judgment rendered by the Punjab
and Haryana High Court in the case of Gopi Chand and
Others vs. The H.M.T Limited and others in Civil Writ
Petition No.5995/2011 by the learned counsel appearing
NC: 2024:KHC:13491
for the respondents has no application to the present set
of facts.
10. This Court has also taken note of the memo
of calculation furnished by the learned counsel appearing
for the petitioners and the same is extracted as under;
Rank of Due Date Date of Amount Delay in Amount of
the Payment Paid years Interest
Parties
P1 01.01.2012 04.10.2023 1,82,935/- 11 years 10 1,31,700/-
months
P2 01.05.2012 04.10.2023 1,88,115/- 11 years 5 1,29,200/-
months
P3 01.01.2012 04.10.2023 1,92,708/- 11 years 10 1,31,200/-
months
11. Upon careful examination of the provided
table, it is evident that due dates for payment of leave
encashment to petitioners 1, 2, and 3 were 01.01.2012,
01.05.2012 and 01.01.2012 respectively. However, the
actual payment to the petitioners was made on
04.10.2023. This significant delay resulted in a
considerable period of 11 years and 10 months, 11 years
and 5 months, and 11 years and 10 months for petitioner
Nos.1, 2, and 3 respectively. Such prolonged delay in
NC: 2024:KHC:13491
disbursing leave encashment rightfully due to the
petitioners has caused them significant financial hardship
and inconvenience. Consequently, it is imperative for the
respondents - Corporation to acknowledge and rectify this
delay by compensating petitioners for the interest accrued
during the extended period of non-payment.
12. For the reasons stated supra and in view of
the memo of calculation furnished by the learned counsel
appearing for the petitioners, this Court proceeds to pass
the following;
ORDER
(i) The writ petition is disposed off
directing respondents - Corporation to pay
interest at 6% p.a on Rs.1,82,935/-,
Rs.1,88,115/- and Rs.1,92,708/- respectively
from the date it fell due till the date the
payment is made to the petitioners.
NC: 2024:KHC:13491
(ii) The respondents - Corporation shall
comply with this order within six months from
the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
(iii) Pending applications, if any, are
also disposed off.
Sd/-
JUDGE
NBM
