SANT RAM Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) There is a very limited issue involved in the present writ petition. The petitioner, who was serving as a Class-IV employee with the respondent-department, was earlier retired at the age of 58 years. Feeling aggrieved by the fact that he was retired at the age of 58 years, he approached this Court by way of CWP No. 1693 of 2010, titled as Sant Ram vs. State of H.P. and others, with the prayer that, as the petitioner was serving in the Forest Department of the Government of Himachal Pradesh as a Class-IV employee, therefore, he should be superannuated at the age of 60 years and not at the age of 58 years as his services stood regularized in the year 2010 retrospectively w.e.f. 01.01.2000. Said writ petition was allowed by this Court vide judgment dated 27.10.2010 in the following terms:-

(2.) Now the surviving grievance of the petitioner is that though he served the respondent-department till the age of 60 years, yet leave encashment, to which he was entitled to in lieu of serving till the age of 60 years, has not been paid to him and the same was paid only till the age of 58 years. It is in this background that this writ petition has been filed with the prayer that the respondents be directed to release the differential amount of leave encashment, i.e. '11,505/- with interest thereon @ 12% per annum on account of delay in release of the said amount.

(3.) The petition is being opposed by the respondentState inter alia on the ground that it was after his having retired at the age of 58 years that petitioner approached the Court by way of earlier writ petition and as all retiral benefits, including leave encashment stood duly paid to him when petitioner was superannuated at the age of 58 years and as the petitioner did not refund the said amount to the department, therefore, if he insists to be paid difference of leave encashment on having retired from service at the age of 60 years on account of judgment passed by this Court, then the petitioner be directed to pay to the government the interest on the amount of leave encashment which stood paid to him when he was earlier retired at the age of 58 years.