CourtKutchehry.com
High CourtsSingle Bench

Jitendra Singh Negi vs Pankaj Kumar Pandey & Others

Uttarakhand High Court · Decided on 5 October 2021 · Citation: (2021) 10 UK CK 0031

HON’BLE JUDGES
Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Contempt Petition No. 289, 314, 315 Of 2021
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

10 paragraphs · 340 words

Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J

1.

Writ Court, vide order(s) dated 17.03.2020, disposed of WPSS No. 1825 of 2017 in terms of the judgment dated 22.03.2017 passed in WPSS No. 1628 of 2015. Operative portion of the said judgment passed in WPSS No. 1628 of 2015 is reproduced below:-

"Accordingly, the writ petitions are allowed with the direction to the respondents to pay the promotional pay-scale of the Naib-Tehsidlar to the petitioners at Tehri Garhwal, which their counterparts are getting in other districts, working as Collection Amins, subject to the recommendation made by the Committee constituted in the year 2009.

It is also made clear that the petitioners shall be paid the arrears of salary from the due date."

2.

In these contempt petition, it is alleged that the order(s) passed by Writ Court has not been complied with.

3.

District Magistrate, Tehri Garhwal has filed a response affidavit. In paragraph nos. 6 & 7 of the said affidavit, it has been stated that District Magistrate, Tehri Garhwal has passed an order on 03.09.2021, whereby he has sanctioned for grant of monetary dues payable to the petitioner, in terms of order passed by Writ Court.

4.

Since order, sanctioning release of monetary dues, has been passed by Competent Authority on 03.09.2021, this Court hopes and expects that verification of service record shall be completed within four weeks from today and the monetary dues payable to the petitioner would be released to him within next four weeks.

5.

Learned counsel for the petitioner(s) submits that petitioners are entitled to benefit of certain monetary dues from the date of their initial appointment, whereas opposite parties have offered to grant them those benefits only from 09.11.2000.

6.

In view of the averments made in the compliance affidavit, this Court is satisfied that the order passed by Writ Court stands complied with.

7.

Accordingly, contempt petitions are closed. Notices issued to the opposite parties are hereby discharged. However, petitioners shall be at liberty to approach appropriate forum claiming monetary benefit from due date, if any.