Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

DHARAMINDER SINGH versus TEJINDER KAUR & ANR

High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Dharaminder Singh v. Tejinder Kaur & Anr - COCP-763-2005 [2006] RD-P&H 4168 (14 July 2006)

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

C.O.C.P. No. 763 of 2005

Date of Decision:-20.7.2006

Dharaminder Singh

.....Petitioner

through

Mr. D.R. Punia, Advocate

vs.

Tejinder Kaur and another

.....Respondents

through

Mr.G.S.Cheema, Sr. DAG

Punjab.

CORAM:
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT

1.Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2.To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3.Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? SURYA KANT, J.

The petitioner along with various employees had filed C.W.P.No.10097 of 2000, inter alia, claiming the pay parity and consequential revised pay-scales including arrears thereof. The writ petition was allowed on August 7, 2002 and a direction was issued that first instalment of Rs.4.25 crores which was already allocated for payment of arrears of revised pay etc., shall be released and disbursed within a period of four weeks while the remaining amount was to be released within one year in as many instalments as the State considers appropriate. The Division Bench further directed that " in the event of default, the petitioners would be entitled to recover the amount along with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of its being due till the date of payment proportionately."

Alleging non-compliance of these directions, this contempt petition has been filed.

In response to the show cause notice, an affidavit has been filed by Mr.M.P.Singh, Secretary Higher Education, Department of Higher Education in which it is stated that the directions issued by this Court have been complied with and the petitioners have received full and final payment on October 14, 2005 vide receipt Annexure R-1.

As is clearly discernible from the order dated August 7, 2002 passed by this Court, all the arrears were to be paid within one year from August 7, 2002. Admittedly, the petitioner has been paid such arrears on October 14, 2005 only. Thus, there being a default, the petitioner is entitled to interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date the amount became due till the payment thereof as directed by this Court vide judgment dated August 7, 2002 referred to above.

Consequently, this petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to pay interest to the petitioner as directed by this Court, within a period of three months from today.

Disposed of.

Rule discharged.

July 20, 2006 ( SURYA KANT )

poonam JUDGE


Copyright

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

Advertisement

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 |

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