Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Gujarat
  4. /
  5. 2012
  6. /
  7. January

Ranjitsinh vs Ghusar

High Court Of Gujarat|12 March, 2012

JUDGMENT / ORDER

1. Heard Mr. Mishra, learned advocate for the petitioner and Mr. Patel, learned AGP for the respondent authority.
2. On previous occasion the orders including the order dated 24.1.2012 were passed under which directions to the respondent authority were issued.
3. Now the respondent authority has filed affidavit, stating, inter alia that on 22.2.2012 the amount mentioned in the recovery certificate i.e. Rs.1,22,431/- is recovered and paid to the petitioner.
4. Mr. Mishra, learned advocate for the petitioner has admitted the said aspect and has accepted that the amount mentioned in the recovery certificate is recovered and paid to the petitioner.
5. Thus, the recovery certificate stands duly executed. Consequently the relief prayed for by the petitioner stands satisfied and any other or further orders on that count now are not required.
In the affidavit filed by the Public Relation Officer it is also clarified that appropriate departmental action against the concerned officer have been initiated.
Thus, direction passed by the Court on that count are also complied.
Hence the petition is now required to be closed in view of the fact that the concerned officer is under departmental action.
6. Mr. Mishra, learned advocate for the petitioner has submitted that only principal amount has been recovered whereas the petitioner is entitled to interest for the entire period during which the delay is caused in making payment.
7. Since present petition has been taken out only against the inaction on part of respondent Collector and his office in executing recovery certificate and considering the fact that recovery certificate has been issued only for sum of Rs.1,22,431/- this Court cannot travel beyond the scope of the petition and beyond the scope of the recovery certificate, however it is clarified that if the petitioner's claim for interest, in accordance with the order passed by the Workman Compensation Commissioner and / or in accordance with the provisions under the Act is not complied with, then it would be open to the petitioner to take out appropriate proceedings before the Commissioner and seek necessary orders in accordance with law as regards his claim for interest.
With the aforesaid clarification the petition stands disposed of accordingly.
(K.M.THAKER,J.) Suresh* Top
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Ranjitsinh vs Ghusar

Court

High Court Of Gujarat

JudgmentDate
12 March, 2012