Research › Browse › Judgment

Supreme Court of India · body

2018 DIGILAW 23 (SC)

State of U. P. v. Israr Ahmad

2018-01-08

AMITAVA ROY, KURIAN JOSEPH

body2018
JUDGMENT : Kurian, J. Application for setting aside abatement is allowed. Delay in filing the application for substitution is condoned and the application for substitution is allowed. 2. Leave granted. 3. The State approached this Court, aggrieved by an order dated 19.12.2007 passed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench in Special Appeal No. 225 of 2001. 4. The Division Bench declined to interfere with the order dated 19.07.2000 passed by the learned Single Judge. The learned Single Judge issued a direction to pay the revised pay-scale to the respondents along with interest at the rate of 12%. 5. This Court had limited the notice on the issue of interest. Having regard to the contentious issues raised in the matter, we are of the view that there was no justification for granting interest on the revised pay-scale. Now that the State is not keen on the challenge of parity and the consequential revised pay-scale, we are of the view that the order on interest should be vacated. Ordered accordingly. 6. The appeal is disposed of with a further direction that in case the emoluments in the revised pay-scale have not yet been granted, the same shall be paid within three months from today.