IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.O.C.P. No. 1799 of 2008 Date of Decision : February 3, 2009 Ajmer Singh ....Petitioner Versus Karan Avtar Singh and others .....Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.P.S. MANN Present : Mr. Vikas Bahl, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. M.C.Berry, Addl. Advocate General, Punjab, for the respondents. T.P.S. MANN, J. (Oral) On July 16, 2007 while disposing of CWP No. 8744 of 2006 filed on behalf of the petitioner, this Court granted two reliefs to the petitioner, first one was that he was entitled to receive Rs.3718/- on account of travelling allowance and Rs.8014/- in lieu of leave travel concession, the total amount due to the petitioner being Rs.11,732/-. On instructions received from Mr. Kirpal Singh, Senior Assistant, Office of Chief Engineer, PWD (Roads and Bridges), Patiala, learned State counsel informed the Court that the amount of Rs.11,372/- shall be paid to the petitioner within two weeks from that day. The other relief granted to the petitioner was the interest on the retiral benefits commencing from 1.11.2002, which interest was to be paid to the petitioner at normal banking interest prevalent as on 1.11.2002. The amount of interest was to be calculated by the respondents C.O.C.P. No. 1799 of 2008 -2- thereafter within one month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of the other and to be released to the petitioner within a further period of one month. According to the petitioner, a period of nine months had elapsed from the date of passing of the order by the High Court but still the respondents had not made the payments. Therefore, the respondents be proceeded against under Sections 11 and 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act and, punished accordingly. Replies have already been filed by respondents No.3 and 4. It is the case of the respondents that the amount of Rs.11,732/- on account of travelling allowance and in lieu of leave travel concession as well as the amount of Rs.54,738/- towards interest on the retiral benefits have been paid to the petitioner on 20.11.2008. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the respondents were not justified in granting the interest @ 3.5% per annum on the retiral benefits and it should have been atleast 18% per annum. It is also submitted that the aforementioned amounts were payable to the petitioner long time back and the respondents took unduly long in releasing the payments. Learned State counsel submits that information was sought from the Manager, State Bank of India, Sector 7-C, Chandigarh, so as to find out the normal rate of interest during the period 1.11.2002 and 31.3.2008 and in reply thereof, the respondents were informed that saving bank rate of interest during the aforementioned period was 3.5% per annum. Regarding the delay C.O.C.P. No. 1799 of 2008 -3- in making the aforementioned payments, it has been submitted that the delay was caused due to lengthy departmental procedure because the sanctions were to be obtained from different quarters of the Government. The case for obtaining sanction was forwarded by the Head of the Department, i.e., Chief Engineer, PWD (B&R), Patiala, to the Administrative Department and subsequently after examining the case, the sanctions were accorded by the Finance Department for payments of time barred claims and claims ordered for payment to the petitioner by the High Court. Therefore, the delay was neither intentional nor deliberate but due to the reasons aforementioned. It is a fact that a statement was made on behalf of the respondents before the Division Bench of this Court on July 16, 2007 that the amount of Rs.11,732/- would be paid to the petitioner within two weeks from that day. As regards the interest on the retiral benefits, the Court had directed the respondents to calculate normal banking interest within one month from the date of the receipt of the certified copy of the order and to release the payment within a further period of one month. In case the respondents were not in a position to make the payment within the prescribed period, they could have approached this Court for the extension of the time. Instead of doing so, they had been practically sleeping over the matter. Ultimately, it was 16 months after passing of the aforementioned order that the payments of Rs.11,732/- and Rs.54,738/- have been made to the petitioner. Once the Court had already directed the respondents to pay the aforementioned amount, the respondents were required to comply with the directions. As is apparent, the respondents did not comply with the C.O.C.P. No. 1799 of 2008 -4- directions and practically waited for the petitioner to move this Court by filing the present petition under Sections 11 and 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act. The present petition practically jolted the respondents from their deep slumber to rush with the matter and the payments were made to the petitioner only on 20.11.2008. This approach of the respondents cannot be appreciated and is strongly condemned. Respondents No.3 and 4 in their respective affidavits have already tendered unqualified and unconditional apologies for withholding the payments of the aforementioned amounts. Respondent No.2 is present in person. Although, no reply has been filed on his behalf, yet he also tenders unqualified and unconditional apology orally for the delay in making the payments of the aforementioned amounts to the petitioner. The apologies tendered by respondents No.2 to 4 are accepted, subject to payment of Rs.5,000/- as costs on each of the two respondents, i.e., respondents No.2 and 3 so that the petitioner, who retired in the year 2002 gets some solace for being denied his retiral benefits and other amounts of travelling allowance and leave travel concession and finally receiving the payments after two rounds of litigation. Resultantly, the present petition is disposed of by imposing costs of Rs.5,000/-, on each of respondents No.2 and 3. The costs be paid by the said respondents to the petitioner within 15 days from today. ( T.P.S. MANN ) C.O.C.P. No. 1799 of 2008 -5- February 3, 2009 JUDGE ajay-1