2025:UHC:2100-DB 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI G. NARENDAR AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE ALOK MAHRA SPECIAL APPEAL NO. 360 OF 2024 24TH MARCH, 2025 Nagar Nigam Roorkee …… Appellant Versus Pawan Kumar …… Respondents Counsel for the appellant : Mr. Lalit Miglani, learned counsel through video conferencing Counsel for the respondent : Mr. Parikshit Saini, learned counsel for the respondent The Court made the following: JUDGMENT: (per Hon’ble The Chief Justice Sri G. Narendar) There is delay of four days in filing the present special appeal, which is not seriously opposed by learned counsel for the respondent. Therefore, the delay is condoned. Delay Condonation Application (I.A. No. 02 of 2025) is allowed. 2025:UHC:2100-DB 2 2) We have heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned counsel for the respondent. 3) The respondent is before this Court being aggrieved by the interim order dated 23.10.2024, passed in Writ Petition (S/S) No. 2016 of 2024, titled as “Pawan Kumar Vs Nagar Nigam Roorkee”, whereby the learned Single Judge was pleased to restrain the respondent from initiating any recovery to recover the amount said to have been paid in excess, and further directed release of the entire retiral benefits including the amount towards Leave Encashment and other retiral dues except that amount towards Gratuity. 4) The above due, according to learned counsel for the appellant / petitioner, is in the range of Rs.17,32,150/-, and counsel for the petitioner submits that the amount due by way of Gratuity is in the range of above Rs.20,00,000/-. 5) It that view of the matter, we are of the opinion that the impugned interim order is fair and equitable one. The appellant, admittedly, is a senior citizen, and having demitted office, the senior citizen cannot be left without means of survival. 2025:UHC:2100-DB 3 6) In that view, the order being an interim order and an equitable one, we decline to interfere with the considered and reasoned order of the learned Single Judge. 7) Accordingly, the special appeal stands rejected. We request the learned Single Judge to expedite the consideration and disposal of the writ petition, in view of the fact that the dispute involves pensionary benefit. ________________ G. NARENDAR, C.J. ___________ ALOK MAHRA, J. Dt: 24TH MARCH, 2025 Negi HIMANS HU NEGI Digitally signed by HIMANSHU NEGI DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=bb3b60774012c1ef1dae20d13aaf 116e73351fdaf6878326386908a7f90d5757 , postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=75BD9D0FB7F4A80990FC51 A722A6BC552D470EB4FD2F88DDF7C18D B2A1524A4D, cn=HIMANSHU NEGI Date: 2025.03.26 10:45:04 +05'30'