Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 2 of 2 (0.24 seconds)

No. 627366-A J.W.O. R.S. Prajapati vs Union Of India (Uoi) And Ors. on 20 April, 2007

11. As regards delay in making the payment of leave encashment to the applicant is concerned, it is stated that the respondents have not given any cogent and plausible reasons/grounds on which the action of the respondents can be said to be justified. In the Counter Affidavit, the respondents did not disclose the concrete reasons for not paying the amount of Leave encashment for a period of two years. In this regard, it is stated that though there is no specific rule for payment of interest on the delayed disbursement of leave encashment, but since the respondents have failed to disclose any valid reason/ground for not paying the amount of leave encashment in time and it has been paid after a period of two years and as such the applicant is entitled for payment of interest thereon. If the respondents have taken prompt and logical action on the issue of payment of leave encashement, then certainly the respondents could have avoided two years in making the payment. Similar controversy came up before this Tribunal in O.A. No. 595 of 2011 in re. Dr. R.S. Prajapati Vs. Union of India & Others which came to be disposed of with certain directions. The ratio laid down in the said case is squarely applicable in the case, in hand, as the respondents have failed to disclose any reason/ground for delay in making the payment of leave encashment.
Delhi High Court Cites 1 - Cited by 1 - S N Aggarwal - Full Document
1