High CourtsSingle Bench

Aruna Sharma vs Dr. Archana Srivastava & Another

Uttarakhand High Court · Decided on 3 September 2021 · Citation: (2021) 09 UK CK 0026

HON’BLE JUDGES
Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Contempt Petition No. 80 Of 2018
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

5 paragraphs · 198 words

Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J

1.

Mr. J.S. Bisht, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the opposite parties has made a statement that pursuant to the order dated 3.05.2017 passed in WPSS No. 2379 of 2016, the amount of gratuity, deducted from the petitioner, has now been released in his favour. He further informs the Court that the amount of leave encashment has also been released to the petitioner.

2.

Regarding interest, he has apprised the Court that Director General, Medical, Health & Family Welfare, Dehradun has fixed responsibility to pay the interest upon Ministerial Assistant and the then Chief Medical Superintendent in the ratio of 40 : 60, respectively; 40% amount, to be payable as interest to the petitioner, has been recovered from the concerned Ministerial Assistant and there is no clarity in respect of remaining 60% amount.

3.

Since the order of Writ Court has been substantial complied with, therefore, nothing survives in the contempt petition.

4.

Accordingly, the contempt petition is closed. Notices issued to the opposite parties are hereby discharged. However, opposite parties shall make endeavour for recovering the remaining amount, including interest, in order to pay the same to the petitioner, positively within three months.