SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(SC) 9928

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
SURYA KANT, JOYMALYA BAGCHI, JJ
STATE OF U.P. & ANR. – Appellant
Versus
RATNESH SAXENA & ANR. – Respondent


Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr. P. S. Patwalia, Sr. Adv., Mr. Rana Mukherjee, Sr. Adv., Mr. Rajeev Kumar Dubey, Adv., Mr. Krishnam Mishra, Adv., Mr. Ashiwan Mishra, Adv., Ms. Aditi Mishra, Adv., Ms. Vidushi Pandey, Adv., Mr. Eshan Kumar Saxena, Adv., Mr. Himanshu Kumar, Adv., Mr. Subham Bahuguna, Adv., Mr. Kamlendra Mishra, AOR
For the Respondent(s):

Table of Content
1. substantial compliance with court orders. (Para 1)

O R D E R

10:11:03 IST Reason:

2. We have considered the submissions. In view of the fact that most of the retiral benefits have been paid to respondent No.1, we are not inclined to interfere in the matter. The petitioners may therefore release the interest amount in favour of respondent No.1 within a period of four weeks. However, liberty is granted to the petitioners to raise an objection before the High Court against the grant of interest in such cases where the retirees are responsible for an inordinate delay in approaching the Court. Such a plea shall be considered by the High Court in the facts and circumstances of each case and in accordance with law, notwithstanding the award of interest directed by the impugned judgment.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top