Bombay High CourtWP/2154/2016dismissedrule discharged

Pandhari S/O. Bijaram Dhakne v. Nagar Nagsen Sporting Club, Thr. Secretary Shri. S. B. Jamankar, Nagpur And Others

2016-07-13Hon'Ble Smt. Justice V.A. Naik,Hon'Ble Mrs. Justice Swapna Joshi2 pages

WP2154-16 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 2154/2016 (PANDHARI BIJARAM DHAKNE VERSUS NAGAR NAGSEN SPORTING CLUB, NAGPUR & OTHERS) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Shri P.D. Meghe, counsel for the petitioner.

Shri A.A. Bade, counsel for the R-1.

Shri A.M. Balpande, A.G.P. for the R-3.

CORAM : SMT.VASANTI A. NAIK AND MRS. SWAPNA JOSHI, JJ.

DATE : JULY 13 , 2016.

By this writ petition, the petitioner seeks the direction against the respondent nos.1 and 2 to release the amount towards leave encashment benefits. The petitioner has sought interest on the said amount at the rate of 18% per annum.

It is not in dispute that during the pendency of the writ petition, the entire dues that are liable to be paid to the petitioner towards leave encashment, have been paid. The learned counsel for the petitioner, however, states that since there is a delay in paying the amount to the petitioner, the respondents should be directed to pay interest at the rate of 18% per anuum.

In the circumstances of the case, we are not inclined to direct the respondents to pay interest on the said amount. It appears that the process to pay the benefits towards leave encashment was initiated by the respondent nos.1 and 2 and the matter was then referred to the respondent no.3, who paid the amount in June-2016.

WP2154-16 In view of the aforesaid, since the amount towards the leave encashment benefits is received by the petitioner and since we are not inclined to direct the respondents to pay interest on the said amount, we dismiss the writ petition with no order as to costs.

JUDGE JUDGE APTE