Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details


High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation


Kamlesh Sharma & Anr. v. B.C. Gupta, IAS & Anr. - COCP-12-2004 [2006] RD-P&H 5101 (1 August 2006)


COCP No.12 of 2004

Date of decision: August 10, 2006.

Smt. Kamlesh Sharma & Anr.



Dr. B.C. Gupta, IAS & Anr.


Present: Shri C.M. Chopra, Advocate for the petitioner.

Shri G.S. Cheema, Sr. Dy. Advocate General, Punjab.

Surya Kant, J. (Oral)

The petitioners filed CWP No.13160 of 1998, which was allowed by this Court on 31.3.2003, after holding that the same was covered by an earlier decision of this Court dated 17.4.1995 rendered in CWP No.5936 of 1994 (Mrs. Avinash Bhatia, Training Officer (Female) v. State of Punjab). It was also directed that the aforesaid judgment in Mrs. Avinash Bhatia's case be complied with in the case of the petitioners "within three months of the receipt of certified copy of this order".

There is no denial to the fact that instead of granting necessary reliefs to the petitioners within three months, as directed by this Court, the consequential benefits were sanctioned in their favour on 25.2.2004 and the same were paid to them after 15 days thereafter.

In this backdrop, Learned Counsel for the petitioners contends that in view of the directions issued by this Court in Avinash Bhatia's case (supra), the petitioners are entitled to be paid interest @ 15% per annum for the delay period.

In Avinash Bhatia's case, this Court vide order dated 17.4.1995 directed as follows:-

"In the result, the writ petition is allowed. The respondents are directed to give revised pay scale of Rs.2200-4000 to the petitioner w.e.f. 1.1.1991 and also grant her all consequential benefits. Arrears of salary shall be paid to the petitioner within four months of the submission of a certified copy of this order failing which she shall be entitled to get interest @ 15% per annum from the date of this order. Parties are left to bear their own costs."

Since the case of the petitioners was allowed in the same terms, there can be no exception but to hold that the petitioners are also entitled to be paid interest @ 15% per annum. Consequently, having regard to the fact that the directions issued by this Court have since been complied with by the respondents, this contempt petition is disposed of with a direction that the petitioners be paid interest at the same rate as was granted by this Court in Avinash Bhatia's case w.e.f. 1.4.2003 till 31.1.2004. The arrears of interest shall be paid to the petitioners within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.

Disposed of.

Rule discharged.

August 10, 2006. [ Surya Kant ]

kadyan Judge


Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites


dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.