IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR TUESDAY, THE 1ST DECEMBER 2009 / 10TH AGRAHAYANA 1931 RP.No. 1123 of 2009(N) -------------------------- (AGAINST JUDGMENT DTD.20.1.09 IN W.P.(C) 16519/07) REVIEW PETITIONER/PETITIONER: -------------------------------------- G.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR (RETIRED), GENERAL MANAGER (HRD), COCHIN SHIPYARD LTD., RESIDING AT AMBIKA, K.P.VALLON ROAD, KADAVANTHARA, KOCHI-20. BY MR.PIRAPPANCODE V.S.SUDHEER, ADVOCATE. MR.SAJU JOHN, ADVOCATE. MR.JELSON J.EDAMPADAM, ADVOCATE. RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS: ----------------------------------- 1. UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, MINISTRY OF SHIPPING ROAD TRANSPORT AND HIGHWAYS, DEPARTMENT OF SHIPPING, NEW DELHI. 2. COCHIN SHIPYARD LTD., REGISTERED OFFICE, ADMINISTRATIVE BUILDING, PERUMANNOOR P.O., P.B.No.1652, KOCHI-682 015, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR. BY MR.SRI.T.P.M.IBRAHIM KHAN, ASST.S.G OF INDIA. MR.SAJI VARGHESE, ADVOCATE FOR R2. THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01/12/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. ----------------------------------------- Review Petition No.1123 OF 2009 IN W.P.(C) No.16519 OF 2007 ----------------------------------------- Dated this the 1st day of December, 2009. O R D E R This review petition is filled at the instance of the petitioner in the writ petition. The main relief sought for in the writ petition was for a direction to the respondents to forthwith release to the petitioner the Leave Encashment Benefit of 270 days which was withheld on account of the pendency of Crl.M.C No.122/2006. 2. The writ petition was disposed of as per judgment dated 20.01.2009. It was held by this Court that there is no reason to withhold the amount. In that view of the matter, a direction was issued to the 2nd respondent to disburse the leave encashment benefit of 270 days to the petitioner within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. Aggrieved by the non-consideration of the claim for payment of interest at 12%, this review petition has been filed. R.P.No.1123/2009 2 3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel appearing for respondents. 4. The petitioner retired from service on 31.10.2006. Exhibit P2 is the representation filed by him seeking for various benefits and by Exhibit P3 dated 27.02.2007, all the benefits were sanctioned and except the amount of leave encashment, other benefits were disbursed. What remained is payment towards leave encashment of 270 days. It was withheld by the respondents relying upon the fact that Crl.M.C.No.122/2006 is pending before this Court. It is true that this Court in the judgment has held that the action in withholding the amount cannot be justified. The claim for payment of interest has to be considered in the light of various principles stated by this Court and the Apex Court. If there is unreasonable delay in disbursing the amount, the petitioner is entitled for grant of interest. Here, we are concerned with a case where the amount was sanctioned but it was withheld relying upon the fact that Crl.M.C No.122/2006 is pending. It is not disputed that there was a legal proceeding pending between the parties. This was the reason for R.P.No.1123/2009 3 not releasing the leave encashment benefits at that point of time. Therefore, I am of the view that the petitioner's claim for grant of interest at 12% cannot be justified. This review petition is dismissed. T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR JUDGE smp