WPSS/2399/2022
2022 Latest Caselaw 4104 UK

                Office Notes,
             reports, orders or
SL.           proceedings or
      Date                                     COURT'S OR JUDGES'S ORDERS
No             directions and
             Registrar's order
              with Signatures
                                  WPSS No. 2399 of 2022
                                  Hon'ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.

Mr. Shakti Singh, Advocate for the petitioners.

Mr. P.C. Bisht, Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State of Uttarakhand/ respondent nos. 1, 2, 6 &

Mr. T.A. Khan, Senior Advocate, assisted by Ms. Sadaf, Advocate, holding brief of Mr. Vinay Bhatt, Advocate for respondent nos. 3, 4, 5 & 7.

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

Petitioners were employee of Kisan Cooperative Sugar Mill Ltd., Gadarpur, Udham Singh Nagar. They opted for voluntary retirement under a scheme floated by employer, and their request for voluntary retirement was accepted and petitioners retired w.e.f. 31.10.2015.

Subsequent to their retirement, a Government Order was issued on 29.12.2016, which provided for revised scales to the employees of the concerned Sugar Mill. Petitioners demanded the scales, as revised by Government Order dated 29.12.2016, which was not given to them by Sugar Mill.

Petitioners thereafter filed Writ Petition (S/S) No. 85 of 2018, which was allowed vide judgment dated 03.03.2021 and the Managing Director, Uttarakhand Cooperative Sugar Mills Association Ltd. was directed to give benefit of Government Order dated 29.12.2016 to petitioners. The Sugar Mill concerned filed Special Appeal against the judgment rendered by learned Single Judge, however, the said Appeal was dismissed. Ultimately, petitioners were granted benefit of revised scale in terms of Government Order dated 29.12.2016.

In this writ petition, petitioners have staked claim for interest.

Learned counsel for petitioners submits that since the revised pay scale was admissible to the employees w.e.f. 01.10.2015; while revised pay scale was actually paid to petitioners in the year 2022, therefore, petitioners are entitled for interest on the delayed payment of amount of revised pay scale.

This Court is not impressed with the submission made by learned counsel for petitioners.

Since petitioners had earlier filed a writ petition, which was allowed, however, in the said judgment there was no stipulation regarding interest. It was open for petitioners to press for interest in their earlier writ petition. Subsequent writ petition only for interest and cost of litigation, in my humble opinion, is not maintainable.

It is settled position in law that public law remedy cannot be invoked for settlement of private rights. The claim raised by petitioners is purely civil in nature for which petitioners have remedy of approaching Civil Court.

Accordingly, writ petition fails and is dismissed. No order as to costs.

(Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.) 21.12.2022 Navin