Ocular Evidence Prevails Over Medical Findings: Bombay High Court Upholds Rape Conviction Despite Negative Semen Report & Police Lapses High Court Cannot Pass Inconsistent Orders: Supreme Court Quashes Demolition Order Passed Despite Earlier Restraint In CMDA Regularisation Dispute Supreme Court Upholds Validity Of Open University Degrees Obtained Prior To 2017 Cut-Off Must Be A Polluter Before Being Held Absolutely Liable: Supreme Court Sets Aside NGT Order Against Art Of Living Over Yamuna Event, Orders ₹5 Cr Refund Father Cannot Be Deprived Of Minor's Custody Unless Proved Unfit: Allahabad High Court Hands Over 4-Yr-Old Child To Father, Sets Aside Trial Court Order Right To Speedy Trial Under Article 21 Integral To Personal Liberty': Punjab & Haryana High Court Grants Bail As 24 Witnesses Remain Unexamined No Specific Chemical Opinion That Seized Substance Was Ganja: Gujarat High Court Upholds Acquittal Under Section 2(iii)(b) NDPS Act Mere Pendency Of Criminal Cases Simplicitor No Ground For Externment': Karnataka High Court Quashes Raichur SDM Order Order VI Rule 16 CPC | Defendants Enjoy Greater Latitude In Altering Defence: Punjab & Haryana High Court Explains Doctrinal Leeway Under CPC Boarding Running Train Not Self-Inflicted Injury: Delhi High Court Sets Aside Order Denying Compensation Possession Of One Co-Sharer Is Possession Of All: J&K&L High Court Cannot Invoke Article 226 For Registering FIR Or Restoring Water Supply: Kerala High Court Natural Guardian's Sale Of Minor's Property Without Court Nod Is Voidable, Extinguishes If Not Challenged Within 3 Years Of Majority: Madras High Court Orissa High Court Rejects Cancer-Survivor Husband's Plea To Transfer Maintenance Case Presumption Of Correctness Of Judicial Records Not Absolute And Can Be Rebutted By Direct Evidence: Kerala High Court on Married Daughter Cannot Challenge Partition After 21-Year Slumber If She Had Knowledge: Madhya Pradesh High Court Kerala High Court Orders Immediate Suspension Of Lakshadweep CJM For Allegedly Forging Witness Deposition To Convict Accused Defect In Served Copy Of Affidavit Not Fatal: Supreme Court Restores Election Petition Challenging Lok Sabha Poll Result, Clarifies Law On Form-25 Attestation

Supreme Court Upholds High Court's Order on Delayed Payment of Leave Encashment

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a recent judgment, the Supreme Court of India upheld the decision of the High Court regarding the delayed payment of privilege leave encashment to retired employees. The case, arising from Special Leave Petitions (SLPs) filed by Indian Telephone Industries Ltd., involved a dispute over the payment of interest on the amounts due to retired employees for privilege leave encashment.

The High Court had invoked Article 226 of the Constitution of India when the petitioners, Indian Telephone Industries Ltd., delayed releasing the amounts payable to retired employees. The learned Single Judge of the High Court had directed the petitioners to pay interest on the outstanding amounts at the rate of 8.65 percent.

The petitioners then challenged this order by filing a Special Appeal before the Division Bench of the High Court. The Division Bench, in response, directed the petitioners to provide a satisfactory explanation for the delay in making the payment and file an affidavit. However, the Division Bench found the affidavit to be vague and not in compliance with their earlier order.

The impugned order dismissing the Special Appeal was based on the petitioners' inability to satisfactorily explain the delay and the lack of justification for the delay in filing the Special Appeal.

The Supreme Court, in its judgment, observed, "The Division Bench was right in finding the affidavit unsatisfactory," and further noted, "The impugned order has been complied with." Consequently, the Supreme Court declined to entertain the special leave petitions but clarified that this decision should not be construed as affirming the view of the learned Single Judge.

This judgment highlights the importance of timely payment and adherence to court orders. It serves as a reminder of the legal obligations that organizations have towards their retired employees and the consequences of not meeting these obligations.

Date of Decision: 26-09-2023                     

INDIAN TELEPHONE INDUSTRIES LTD. vs RAMA KANT SRIVASTAVA & ORS.       

               

[gview file="https://lawyerenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/India_Telephone_Industries_Ltd_vs_Rama_Kant_Srivastava_on_26_September_2023.pdf"]

Latest Legal News