JULIUS KACHHAP Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant is feeling aggrieved, albeit unnecessarily, by the writ Court's order dtd. 21/7/2023 passed in W.P.(S) No. 6316 of 2022.

(2.) By this order, the writ Court declined to accept the prayer for interest and compensation to the appellant on account of the delayed payment of Travelling Allowances.

(3.) This is not in dispute that the appellant raised a bill in February 2007 for Rs.69,935.00 claiming Travelling Allowance for bringing the dead body of his wife from AIMS at Delhi to Ranchi. This is also a matter of record that Rs.58,685.00 was sanctioned by the competent authority but, according to the appellant, the said amount was not paid to him. Constrained, he approached this Court in W.P.(S) No. 6805 of 2018 which was disposed of by an order dtd. 13/1/2021. In the said writ proceeding, the appellant had raised a grievance as regards reduction in the Travelling Allowance bill submitted by him and, accordingly, a direction was issued to the Principal Secretary, Department of Personnel, Administrative Reforms and Rajbhasha to do the needful. Obviously in the said writ proceeding the appellant did not claim interest on the sanctioned amount of Rs.58,685.00 or at least no such direction was issued by the writ Court. The order passed in W.P.(S) No. 6805 of 2018 attained finality on this count and, therefore, a prayer for interest on the unpaid amount could not have been raised in the subsequent writ proceeding. Such a prayer shall be barred by constructive res-judicate inasmuch as this relief was not sought by the appellant in W.P.(S) No. 6805 of 2018 and, therefore, the same is not permissible to be raised in the subsequent writ proceeding. The writ Court has made the following observations while dismissing W.P.(S) No. 6316 of 2022: