STATE OF PUNJAB Vs. DAYA SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RESPONDENT's suit for declaration to the effect that the order terminating his services was null and void was decreed in the following terms:" in view of my findings on the issue No. 1 above, I decree the suit of the plaintiff to the effect that order No. 2285-87/ecd dated 17. 6. 1983 vide which terminated with effect from 5. 5. 83 is null and void as is arbitrary, in contravention of Civil Services (Punishment and Appeal) Rules, 1970, and in contravention of Constitution of India with all benefits and with all consequential reliefs as a servant which have been declined to him due to the passing of the impugned order. However, there shall be no order as to costs. Decree-Sheet be prepared accordingly and file be consigned to the record-room. " On passing the decree, he was paid arrears of his salary. He was not satisfied with the same and, therefore, he filed an execution application in which he claimed interest on the belated payment of the salary. An objection was raised by the State that under the decree-no interest was payable and, therefore, the decree-holder is not entitled to interest. Objection of the State did not find favour with the executing Court. Interest at the rate of 12 per cent p. a. was allowed by the executing court from the date of filing the suit till the passing of the decree and thereafter at the rate of 6 per cent p. a. till realisation of the amount. The order of the executing Court is being challenged in the present revision petition.

(2.) AFTER hearing learned counsel for the petitioner, I am of the view that this revision petition deserves to succeed. The question raised in the revision petition is as to whether the executing Court can grant interest when the same was not awarded to the respondent under the decree. The matter is squarely covered by a decision of the Supreme Court in State of Punjab and Ors. v. Krishan Dayal Sharma, A. I. R. 1990 S. C. 2177, wherein it was held that in absence of pleadings and direction in judgment or decree, which was under execution, it was not open to the executing Court to award interest. The executing Courti bound by the terms of the decree, it cannot add or alter the decree on its notion of fairness or justice. The right of the decree-holder to obtain relief is determined in accordance with the terms of the decree. Admittedly, in the present case, interest was not awarded to the respondent under the decree and, therefore, order of the executing court cannot be sustained, and the same is hereby quashed.

(3.) CONSEQUENTLY, the revision petition is allowed. No costs.