VISHWESHWAR PRASAD SHARMA Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal against an order dated 26. 9. 2006 of a learned single judge of this Court dismissing an application for modification of the judgment dated 29. 3. 2004. The appellant was a Naib Tehsildar who retired from service on 31. 7. 1992. He filed a Writ Petition No. 45612 of 2003 for a mandamus commanding the respondents in the writ petition State of U. P. through Secretary Revenue, Lucknow/collector, Jhansi and against the Chairman, Board of Revenue, Lucknow to release what he described "as the arrears". The learned single judge in paragraph 4 of the order noted that it was submitted on behalf of the writ petitioner that the representation regarding the correction of revised pay scale is unactioned till date. Learned single judge also noticed the contention of the petitioner that he is entitled to interest at 18% on the unpaid amounts of life insurance claim, leave encashment, commutation of pension and arrears of salary for certain periods. The learned single judge disposed of the writ petition by his order dated 29. 3. 2004 with the direction that the respondents shall pay interest on the delayed payment of the amounts at the rate of 10% per annum from the date of retirement to the date of payment. The State government filed a Special Appeal No. (1043) of 2004, which was found to have no merit and was accordingly dismissed by an order dated 8. 3. 2006. Thereafter an application dated 4. 7. 2006 for modification of the order dated 29. 3. 2004 passed in the writ petition was filed in which it was prayed that interest be awarded at the rate of 18% in place of 10% from the due date. The application was dismissed by the order dated 29. 9. 2006 of the learned single judge. The view taken by the learned single judge is that the question of interest was considered in the order dated 29. 3. 2004, which was affirmed in Special Appeal No. (1043) of 2004, which was passed after considering all the facts and circumstances of the case. The modification application was found to be misconceived. Aggrieved the appellant has filed this special appeal against the judgment and order dated 26. 9. 2006 passed in pursuance of the order dated 29. 3. 2004 of the learned single judge in Writ Petition No. 4561 of 2003. The relief sought in the appeal is to allow the appeal and to modify the order dated 29. 3. 2004 passed by the learned single judge and to allow the writ petition. It was contended by the appellant that the dismissal of the special appeal filed by the State did not affect the maintainability of the application for modification filed by the appellant because in that appeal the court did not have occasion to consider whether the amount of interest was liable to be enhanced. There appears to be some merit in this contention. We have therefore considered the case of the appellant on merits. Two questions are involved in this appeal; one whether the interest awarded to the appellant at the rate of 10% per annum is less. The award of interest is a matter of discretion. There is nothing to indicate that the discretion exercised by the learned single judge suffers from any illegality. The other question, which arises in this appeal is the date from which the amount is payable to the appellant. The learned single judge has held that interest be paid to the appellant from the date of retirement. According to the appellant the interest is payable to him from the date the amount payable became due. It appears that payment on different accounts have been claimed by the appellant. The appellant has not disclosed in the writ petition the precise date from which each of the amounts being claimed by the appellant became due The modification application also appears to have been filed after a period of two years from the date of the original order of the learned single judge dated 29. 3. 2004. In the circumstances no ground for interference with the order passed by the learned single judge has been made out. The appeal is dismissed. .