STATE OF U P Vs. RAM BADAN DUBEY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Special Appeal has been filed by the State of U.P. and two others against the Judgment and Order dated 3 -9 -2002 passed by a learned Judge in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 55579 of 2000.

(2.) THE brief facts relevant for the decision of this appeal are that the writ -petitioner Ram Badan Dubey (respondent in this appeal) was an assistant teacher in a recognized educational institution, namely, Agrasen Inter College, Allahabad. He was given notice dated 11 -2 -1985 that on attaining the age of 60 years he would superannuate on 30 -6 -1985. The writ -petitioner however, challenged the said notice and contended that he was entitled to continue in service upto 30 -6 -1986. The writ -petitioner filed civil suit No. 331 of 1985 praying for a declaration that he was entitled to continue in service till 30 -6 -1986. By Judgment and Decree dated 25 -2 -1988 the trial Court decreed the suit with costs along with a direction to pay all privileges and arrears etc. A time -barred appeal was filed challenging the said judgment of the trial Court. The application for condonation of delay was rejected by the appellate Court vide its order dated 27 -1 -1990. The judgment and order of the trial Court thus became final. The writ -petitioner thereafter ran from pillar to post for getting his arrears of salary, balance amount of pension and group insurance along with interest. Thereafter ultimately he was constrained to put the decree in execution and only after the attachment order was passed and the Jeep of the District Inspector of Schools was attached, the Judgment -Debtors (appellants in this Special Appeal) paid the dues of the writ -petitioner on 13 -12 -1997 which was after 11 1/2 years of the retirement of the writ -petitioner on 30 -6 -1986. The writ -petitioner thereafter filed the writ petition claiming that he was entitled to interest for 11 1/2 years at the rate of 18% per annum and thus claimed a sum of Rs. 4,14,300 towards interest for the delay in payment.

(3.) IT may be noted that this appeal had also been filed after delay of more than three months. However, on hearing the parties and considering the averments made in the affidavits, the delay has already been condoned.