IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. C.W.P. No. 5844 of 2011. Decided on: 03.08.2011. B.L. Khanna. ….. Petitioner. -Versus- State of Himachal Pradesh and another. …… Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph, Chief Justice. The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, Judge. For the petitioner. : Mr. M.L. Sharma, Advocate. For the respondents. : Mr. Ankush Dass Sood, Additional Advocate General with Mr. J.K. Verma, Deputy Advocate General. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Justice Rajiv Sharma, J. (Oral): Material facts necessary for adjudication of this petition are that the services of the petitioner were allotted to the State of Himachal Pradesh on 01.02.1969. He was transferred to Paonta Sahib on 29.04.1995. He assailed this transfer order by way of Original Application bearing O.A. No. 511 of 1995 before the learned erstwhile Himachal Pradesh Administrative Tribunal. Learned Tribunal stayed the operation of the order on 21.07.1995. In the meantime, the petitioner was transferred from Subathu to Rajgarh. He assailed this order before the learned Tribunal by way of O.A. No. 1470 of 1995. Learned Tribunal stayed the operation of 2 this order on 01.08.1995. Both these Original Application were disposed of by the learned Tribunal on 20.10.1995. Thereafter, the petitioner was sent on deputation to Dr. Y.S. Parmar University of Horticulture and Forestry, Solan, H.P.. He assailed this decision by way of Original Application bearing O.A. No. 397 of 1996. This petition was dismissed. However, the learned Tribunal has ordered that the due and admissible salary of the petitioner for the periods w.e.f. 01.05.1995 to 31.07.1995 and 01.01.1996 to 19.05.1996 be paid to him. However, fact of the matter is that the petitioner was asked to apply for leave of kind due by the respondents. He assailed this decision also by way of O.A. No. 1229 of 1996. The same was transferred to this Court and assigned C.W.P. No. 3746 of 2008. It was dismissed by the learned Single Judge on 24.03.2009. However, in L.P.A. No. 164 of 2009, this Court passed the following order while disposing of the L.P.A. on 06.04.2010: “1. In case leave of any kind was due to the credit of the petitioner as on the date of the disputed period, the said period shall be credited to that leave account, treating that the petitioner had applied for the leave. 2. In case some portion of the petitiond is not covered by the leave of any kind due to the petitioner being not available as on that period, to the extent required, such period shall be treated as duty for all purposes. 3. Necessary action in view of the above directions shall be taken to settle the whole dispute within a period of three months from the date of production of the copy of this judgment. 3 4. The judgment of the learned Single Judge stands modified to the above extent. 2. In sequel to the directions issued by this Court, the petitioner has been released a sum of `54195/- and `68641/- on 15.02.2011 and 24.02.2011, respectively. 3. Mr. M.L. Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner has strenuously argued that the petitioner has not been paid any interest on the delayed payment of `54195/- and `68641/-. 4. We are of the considered view that while disposing of the L.P.A. No. 164 of 2009 on 6th April, 2010, this Court has not ordered the payment of any interest on the amounts to be released to the petitioner after complying with the directions issued by this Court. The said issue cannot be re-agitated in another writ petition. Accordingly, there is no merit in this petition and the same is dismissed, so also the pending application(s), if any. (Justice Kurian Joseph), Chief Justice. (Justice Rajiv Sharma), Judge. August 03, 2011. (bhupender)