Kapildeo Sharma v. The State Of Bihar, Through The Secretary,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.14322 of 2021 ====================================================== 1.

Kapildeo Sharma Son of Late Nathun Sharma resident of Village - Sampat Bigha, P.S. - Sarauta, District- Jehanabad.

2.

Thakur Prasad son of Late Megha Ram resident of Village - Telari, P.S. - Chenari, District- Rohtas.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar, through the Secretary, Rural Development Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

2.

The Secretary, Rural Development Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. 3.

The Collector, Rohtas.

4.

The District Rural Development Agency, Rohtas at Sasaram, through its Managing Director.

5.

The Deputy Development Commissioner - cum - Managing Director, District Rural Development Agency, Rohtas at Sasaram. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Vaidehi Raman Prasad Singh, Adv.

For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Lalit Kishore, (AG) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 02-02-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the Respondents.

Counsel for the petitioners has filed the present writ petition seeking direction to the respondents to pay to the petitioners 18% compound interest on Leave Encashment Dues of the petitioners, which they have illegally withheld. Counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners had earlier moved before this Court in CWJC No. 6783 of 2015, which was disposed on 09.04.2019. It was allowed in favour of the petitioners and in the said case, a liberty was granted to the

Patna High Court CWJC No.14322 of 2021(3) dt.02-02-2023 2/2 petitioners to make representation for any other dues, for which petitioners are entitled for their services. It was also directed that admissible leave encashment should be paid to the petitioners within a period of 8 weeks.

Counsel submits that the petitioners are legally entitled for receiving leave encashment, which the respondent authorities have paid only after the order passed by this Court i.e. on 09.04.2019 passed in CWJC No. 6783 of 2015. The present application has been filed with a payment of 18% compound interest on leave encashment dues.

Counsel for State submits that amount of leave encashment has already been paid in the light of compliance of order dated 09.04.2019 passed in CWJC No. 6783 of 2015. In the said order, there was no direction about payment of any interest of the leave encashment.

In this background, I am not inclined to entertain this writ petition, therefore, this writ petition is hereby dismissed. (Dr. Anshuman, J.) ashishsingh/- U