JUDGMENT :

Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.

1. Heard Mr. Ashok Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the appellants and Mr. A.K. Sahani, learned counsel for the respondent.

2. This Letters Patent Appeal has been heard through Video Conferencing in view of the guidelines of the High Court taking into account the situation arising due to COVID-19 pandemic. None of the parties have complained about any technical snag of audio-video and with their consent this matter has been heard.

3. The instant intra-court appeal has been filed under Clause 10 of Letters Patent against the judgment dated 19.02.2018 passed in W.P.(C) No. 5298 of 2008, whereby, the writ petition has been allowed with direction to the respondents/appellants to take a final decision in terms of the observations and directions made in the order dated 19.02.2018 within a period of one month from the receipt of a copy of that order and the writ petitioner/respondent was directed to pay the amount so calculated within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of the communication, failing which, the benefits under one time settlement will stand withdrawn.

4. The brief facts of the case, as per the pleadings made in the writ petition, are described herein below for proper adjudication of the lis :-

“M/s Neel Kamal Engineering and Body Builder (P) Ltd., Ranchi was granted a term loan by respondent no.1/appellant no.1. When the said unit failed to pay the dues, the Executive Committee of respondent no.1/appellant no.1 by its order dated 22.07.1995, decided to take possession and sale the mortgage of the aforesaid company and, accordingly, proposed sale of the said unit was advertised inviting tenders on 14.12.1995. On 22.07.1998, the Executive Committee of respondent no.1/appellant no.1, vide Item No. 5789 in the meeting, decided to sell the mortgaged assets of M/s Neel Kamal Engineering and Body Builder (P) Ltd., for total consideration of Rs.35 Lakhs. On 04.01.1999, the writ petitioner/respondent made a representation before respondent no.2/appellant no.2 intimating that he was ready to deposit the amount subject to condition of waiver of interest and passing on good title free from any liability and encumbrances as a condition of contract. He also requested respondent no.2/appellant no.2 to take immediate steps before the Debts Recovery Tribunal to get the property released from all liabilities. By letter dated 11.02.2000 i.e. after lapse of 13 months, the Deputy Manager, Zone-IV of respondent no.1/appellant no.1 intimated the writ petitioner/respondent that the Corporation has absolute right to sell the mortgaged assets and he advised the writ petitioner/respondent to pay the initial cash down amount of sale in terms of the sale order dated 17.08.1998 within 21 days from the date of issuance of the letter. Although the sale order was issued on 17.08.1998, but the matter remained pending in the hands of the Corporation till 11.02.2000 and, thereafter, the writ petitioner/respondent complied with the final decision communicated to him on 11.02.2000 by depositing initial cash down payment. On 28.02.2000, the writ petitioner/respondent deposited the required amount. On 12.07.2000, the writ petitioner/respondent submitted a draft copy of guarantee, hypothecation, agreement etc. for execution which was duly received in the office of respondent no.3/appellant no.3 on 21.07.2000. On 26.07.2000, an agreement for sale-cum-payment of balance loan was executed by and between respondent no.1/appellant no.1 and the writ petitioner/respondent. In Clause-5 of the said agreement, it was indicated that the interest would be calculated and realized on quarterly/rest basis from the date of execution of the sale agreement. The said agreement for sale and even the letter dated 11.02.2000 did not contain any clause of imposing any interest for the period in between sale order and agreement for sale. The Power of Attorney holder of the writ petitioner/respondent on 26.07.2000 requested for revision of repay