State Of Bihar vs Suryadeo Prasad Tewary .
- Neutral2017 INSC 411
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
Where a junior officer has been granted financial benefits by virtue of a final order in contempt proceedings, while a senior officer admittedly senior in rank has been denied the same benefits, the senior officer is entitled to the benefits notwithstanding the finality of the order granting them to the junior officer, as it would be improper and unfair to allow the junior to enjoy benefits while denying them to the senior.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
NON-REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 7029 OF 2009
STATE OF BIHAR & ORS. Appellant(s)
VERSUS
SURYADEO PRASAD TEWARY & ORS. Respondent(s)
WITH
SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) NO. 183 OF 2009
J U D G M E N T
KURIAN, J.
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 7029 OF 2009
1. We are informed that Mr. Pashupati Nath Sinha,
who is admittedly junior to Respondent No. 1, has
been granted the financial benefits. The learned
counsel for the appellants submits that the
disbursement of the benefits is pursuant to the order
passed in contempt proceedings before the High Court.
2. Be that as it may, that order has become final.
The junior having thus enjoyed the benefits and
denying the same to admittedly senior, namely
Respondent No.1 is not proper and fair.
3. In that view of the matter, the appeal is
dismissed. It is directed that the amount lying in Signature Not Verified deposit in the Registry of this Court shall be Digitally signed by JAYANT KUMAR ARORA Date: 2017.05.05 12:22:49 IST Reason: immediately disbursed to Respondent No. 1 along with
accrued interest.
2
4. It is made clear that this Judgment is passed in
the peculiar facts of this case and, therefore, need
not be treated as a precedent.
5. Pending interlocutory applications, if any, stand
disposed of.
SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) NO. 183 OF 2009
1. Delay condoned.
2. Application for substitution is allowed.
3. In view of the Judgment passed in Civil Appeal
No. 7029 of 2009 above, this Special Leave Petition
is dismissed. It is directed that the benefits due
to the legal representative(s) of the first
respondent shall be computed and disbursed within a
period of 12 weeks from today. It is made clear that
in case the amount is not disbursed within the
stipulated time, the legal representative(s) shall be
entitled to interest at the rate of 12% and the
officer(s) responsible for the delay shall be
personally liable for the same.
4. Pending interlocutory applications, if any, stand
disposed of.
.......................J. [ KURIAN JOSEPH ]
.......................J. [ R. BANUMATHI ]
New Delhi;
April 28, 2017.
3
ITEM NO.59 COURT NO.6 SECTION XVI
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Civil Appeal No(s). 7029/2009
STATE OF BIHAR & ORS. Appellant(s)
VERSUS
SURYADEO PRASAD TEWARY & ORS. Respondent(s)
(with appln. (s) for directions and office report)
WITH
SLP(C) No. 183/2009 (With appln for c/delay in filing SLP and Interim Relief and Office Report)
Date : 28/04/2017 These matters were called on for hearing today.
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KURIAN JOSEPH HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE R. BANUMATHI
Counsel for the parties Mr. S. B. Upadhyay, Sr. Adv.
Ms. Kumud Lata Das, Adv.
Mr. Y. K. S. Chauhan, Adv.
Mr. Nagendra Rai, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Abhay Prakash Sahay, Adv. Mr. Amit Kishore Sinha, Adv.
Mr. Arun Kumar Mishra, Adv.
Mr. Jamnesh Kumar, Adv.
Mr. Himanshu Shekhar, Adv.
Mr. Gopal Singh, Adv.
Mr. Rituraj Biswas, Adv.
Mr. Shivam Singh, Adv.
Ms. Sushma Suri, Adv.
UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R
Civil Appeal No.7029 of 2009 and SLP (C) No.183 of 2009 are
dismissed in terms of the signed non-reportable Judgment 4
Pending interlocutory applications, if any, stand disposed
of.
(Jayant Kumar Arora) (Renu Diwan) Court Master Assistant Registrar
(Signed non-reportable Judgment is placed on the file)
This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.
Research this judgment with Miss Lucy
Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.
Try Miss Lucy free