Hari Ram vs Sandeep Bhatnagar

Sandeep Sharma, J

By way of present Contempt Petition, prayer has been made on behalf of the petitioner for initiation of contempt proceedings against the respondent for having intentionally and deliberately disobeyed the order/judgment dated 23.02.2016 passed by the Erstwhile H.P. State Administrative Tribunal, Shimla in OA No.300 of 2016, titled as Hari Ram versus The Himachal Road Transport Corporation and others.

Careful perusal of aforesaid order/judgment, alleged to have been violated, (Annexure C­1), reveals that learned Tribunal below having taken note of the statement made by the learned counsel representing the petitioner that the case of the petitioner is squarely covered under the judgment dated 17.7.2014 rendered by this Court in CWP No.3050 of 2014, titled Nek Ram versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others, disposed of the original application with a direction to the respondents/competent authority to grant similar benefit to the petitioner, if he is found to be similarly situate, within a period of three months from the date of production of certified copy of this order. Since no steps, if any, ever came to be taken at the behest of the respondents for implementation of aforesaid order/judgment, petitioner was compelled to approach this Court in the instant proceedings.

Ms. Shubh Mahajan, learned counsel representing the respondent while placing on record communications dated 20.3.2019, 4.2.2019 and one "No Due Certificate', dated 14.6.2019 issued by the Regional Manager, H.R.T.C.,Taradevi Unit­1, Shimla, contends that order/judgment alleged to have been violated, stands duly complied with. Learned counsel representing the petitioner while fairly admitting the factum with regard to receipt of amount payable on account of death­ cum­retirement gratuity, contends that though leave encashment amounting to Rs.2,60,290/­ has been paid, but no interest has been paid upon the aforesaid amount and as such, order/ judgment alleged to have been violated, cannot be said to be complied with in its letter and spirit.

Learned counsel representing the respondent fairly states that in case petitioner is entitled to interest, if any, on account of leave encashment, same shall be released positively within a period of three weeks from today.

Consequently, in view of the fair statement made by learned counsel representing the respondent, this Court sees no reason to keep the present petition alive and as such, same is accordingly disposed of with the direction to the respondent to do the needful within a period of three weeks, if not already done, failing which, he would further aggravate the contempt. Petitioner is at liberty to get the present proceedings revived in case aforesaid direction issued by this Court is not complied with, so that appropriate action, in accordance with law is taken against erring official. Notices issued to the respondent is hereby discharged accordingly. Besides above, respondent shall also file compliance report in the Registry of this Court.