IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.11962 of 2009 1. THE UNION OF INDIA through the Chief Postmaster General,Bihar Circle, Meghdoot Building, Patna -1 2. The Director Postal Services, (Headquarters) Office of Chief Postmaster General, Bihar Circle, Patna 3. The Senior Superintendent of Post Offices, Patna Postal Division, Patna -4 4. The Director of Accounts, Postal, Exhibition Road, Patna …. ….. Respondents/Petitioners Versus ALAKHDEO PRASAD SINGH, Son of Late Sabit Singh, resident of village Pirauta, PO Kosumhar, via Akbarpur, District Nawada, Ex-Assistant Postmaster, Khagaul, District Patna …. …. Applicant/Respondent ----------- 03- 30.3.2010 Heard Mr. Rakesh Kumar for the petitioners, and Mr. M P Dixit for the respondent. The petitioners raise a grievance with respect to that part of the order dated 14.11.2006 (Annexure 3), passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Patna Bench, in OA No.789 of 2005 (Alakhdeo Prasad Singh vs. The Union of India & Ors.), whereby the original application has been disposed of with the direction to the petitioners herein to make payment of the amounts on account of leave encashment and GIS within two months of receipt of a copy of the order, with interest as per rules or prevailing circular, for the delayed payment. Learned counsel for the petitioners raises a grievance before this Court that the order for payment of interest is unjust and improper. 2. We have perused the materials on record and considered the submissions of learned counsel for the parties. Paragraphs-5 and 7 of the order in question are reproduced hereinbelow for the facility of quick reference:- “5. However, in this regard the learned counsel for 2 the respondents has submitted that while the respondents have no objection to the payment of amount of leave encashment and of GIS for which action is being taken, the amount of gratuity cannot be paid in view of Rule 69 of Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as the `1972 Rules’). …….. ………. ……… “7. In that view of the matter, the respondents are directed to calculate and make payment of amounts on account of leave encashment and GIS within two months of receipt of a copy of the order, with interest as per rules or prevailing circular, for the delayed payment. A decision about payment of gratuity and the full pension will be taken within three months of the conclusion of the departmental proceeding and the criminal case, when the result, particularly of the criminal case is brought to the notice of the respondents.” It is thus evident that the order for payment of leave encashment and GIS along with interest as per the rules or prevailing circular has been passed and is indeed a consent order. Therefore, there was no scope for challenging the same by preferring the present writ petition. Secondly, the Tribunal has not exercised its judicial discretion in granting the interest, rather it has to be paid as per rules or prevailing circular. We, therefore, do not find the slightest justification to prefer the present writ petition which is indeed a frivolous one burdening the court with a most unwanted litigation. We record our strong sense of displeasure in this connection. 3. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed with costs quantified at Rs.5000/- (five thousand) which shall be deposited with the Patna High Court Legal Services Committee within six weeks from today and the receipt thereof shall be 3 produced in this Court within the same period, failing which contempt proceeding shall be initiated against respondent- petitioner no.4. ( S K Katriar ) ( Kishore K Mandal ) mrl