SPA/150/2022
2022 Latest Caselaw 1890 UK

             IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
                                  AT NAINITAL
                 THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI VIPIN SANGHI

                                          AND

                        THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE S.K. MISHRA

                 SPECIAL APPEAL NO.150 OF 2022

                               29TH JUNE, 2022

BETWEEN:

State of Uttarakhand & others                                       .....Appellants.
And

Shankar Datt Paintola                                               ....Respondent.

Counsel for the Appellants : Mr. B.S. Parihar, learned Standing Counsel for the State.

Counsel for the Respondent : Mr. K.P. Upadhyaya, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. Hemant Pant, learned counsel.

The Court made the following:

JUDGMENT:(per Hon'ble The Chief Justice Sri Vipin Sanghi)

The present appeal is directed against the

judgment dated 18.11.2021, rendered by the learned Single

Judge, in Writ Petition (S/S) No.301 of 2019.

2. The learned Single Judge found that the appellants

had wrongly made deduction of Rs.2,44,057/- from the retiral

benefits of the respondent-writ petitioner. In fact, the

appellants also released the aforesaid amount to the

respondent during the pendency of the writ petition on

01.11.2021. We may note that the respondent had retired on

31.12.2017. In the aforesaid background, the learned Single

Judge directed the appellants herein to pay interest to the

respondent @6% per annum on the amount withheld in

pursuance of Government Order dated 28.11.2017. The

learned Single Judge also directed the appellants to pay

arrears of pension, as determined based on the last salary

drawn by the respondent on the date of attainment of the age

of superannuation, i.e. 31.12.2017.

3. The limited submission made by Mr. B.S. Parihar,

the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the appellants, is

that since withholding of the amount of Rs.2,44,057/- was

not deliberate, the grant of interest @6% per annum in

favour of the respondent was not justified.

4. We do not find any merit in the submission of the

learned Standing Counsel for the State-appellants. The

appellants may not have acted malafide while withholding the

partial retiral benefit of the respondents. However,

admittedly, the appellants did make a mistake by wrongly

withholding the amount of Rs.2,44,057/- due to the

respondent. The respondent, having been denied the

enjoyment of the said amount, is entitled to be compensated

for the loss of enjoyment of the said amount at the time of

his retirement. Interest is awarded on account of falling value

of rupee.

5. In our view, grant of interest @6% per annum

cannot be said to be unreasonable looking to the rate of

inflation.

6. We, therefore, do not find any merit in this special

appeal, and the same is, hereby, dismissed.

7. Pending application, if any, also stands disposed of.

(VIPIN SANGHI, C.J.)

(S.K. MISHRA, J.) Dated: 29thJune, 2022 NISHANT