R.A. No. 2 of 2011 (O&M) -1- IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH R.A. No. 2 of 2011 (O&M) in LPA No. 1292 of 2009 Date of decision May 13, 2011 Suresh Kumar …Appellant Versus State of Haryana and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. KUMAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.N. JINDAL Present: Mr. Piyush Kant Jain, Addl. A.G., for the applicant-respondents Mr. Veneet Sharma, Advocate for the non applicant-appellant. 1. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? M.M. KUMAR, J. Affidavit filed on behalf of respondent Nos. 1 to 4 in the Court today is taken on record. This is an application seeking review of our order dated 09.08.2010 to the extent that the interest @ 10% on the arrears of pay and / or pension is not payable. The basic reliance has been placed on the instructions dated 29.12.2010 (R-1) and 29.09.2010 (R-3). According to the assertion made by the applicant, these instructions postulates the payment of arrears of salary in installments. It has also been claimed that no interest for various reasons should be charged much less 12% as per direction issued. R.A. No. 2 of 2011 (O&M) -2- There is delay in the application seeking review of our order and an application has also been filed seeking condonation of delay in filing of the appeal. The claim made by the applicant-respondents has been contested by the respondent by filing reply. We have heard learned counsel for the parties. The basis for seeking review of our order is that it goes against the instructions dated 29.12.2010 and 29.09.2010. The order has in fact been passed on 09.08.2010. It is thus, evident that the aforesaid instructions which have been issued later on, would not constitute a basis for seeking review of the order. Moreover, said instructions would not govern the issue which stood already decided because instructions can not be issued with retrospective effect. There is, thus, no ground for review of our order. Accordingly, the review application fails and the same is dismissed. In view of the dismissal of the review application, we do not wish to pass any order on the application seeking condonation of delay (M.M. KUMAR) JUDGE (A.N. JINDAL) JUDGE May 13, 2011 Atul