STATE OF HARYANA & ORS. Vs. R.K. GUPTA & ORS.

Supreme Court of India (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)

Appeal (Civil), 8661 of 2009, Judgment Date: Dec 08, 2015

                                                              NON-REPORTABLE

                        IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
                        CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                        CIVIL APPEAL NO. 8661 OF 2009

STATE OF HARYANA & ORS.                                         Appellant(s)

                                VERSUS

R.K. GUPTA & ORS.                                              Respondent(s)

                                    WITH

                            C.A. No. 8703 OF 2009


                               J U D G M E N T

KURIAN, J.
1.    Heard Ms. Nidhi Gupta, learned counsel  appearing  for  the  State  of
Haryana  and  Mr.  M.  C.  Dhingra,  learned  counsel  appearing   for   the
respondents.
2.    The State is aggrieved by the Judgment dated 11.08.2003 in Civil  Writ
Petition No. 4518 of 2000, in  the matter of additional Dearness  Allowance,
wherein the High Court followed an earlier judgment  in  CWP  No.  13300  of
1990, however, limiting the  monetory  benefits  to  38  months  immediately
preeceding the filing of the Writ Petition.
3.    It is seen that the relied on judgment was pursued before  this  Court
in SLP (C) No. 2578 of 1996 and by order  dated  09.05.1997,  the  same  was
dismissed on the ground of delay.  The State filed Review Petition  (C)  No.
2246 of 1998.  There was a delay in filing  the  Review  Petition  as  well.
However, this Court dismissed the Review Petition  observing  ".....both  on
the ground of limitation as  well  as  on  merits."   Thus,  the  relied  on
Judgment has become final at the hands of this Court.
4.    We also find another order dated  09.10.2001  of  this  Court  in  the
appeal filed by the State of Haryana itself  in  Civil  Appeal  No.  923  of
1992, wherein also, this Court took the view that the orders passed  by  the
High Court did not call for any interference.
5.    Though Ms.  Nidhi  Gupta,  learned  counsel  for  the  State,  made  a
pursuasive attempt inviting our attention to the earlier  Judgment  of  this
Court titled as "State of Haryana and Anr. Vs.  O.  P.  Sharma  &  Ors"  and
other connected matters, reported in (1993) Supp. 2 SCC 386, we  are  afraid
we cannot take a different view than what has been taken in  the  relied  on
Judgment, which has attained finalty before this Court on merits.
6.    In view of the above, the Civil Appeals are dismissed  with  no  order
as to costs.

                                                   .......................J.
                                                           [ KURIAN JOSEPH ]


                                                   .......................J.
                                                             [ ARUN MISHRA ]

      New Delhi;
      December 08, 2015.