Kaptan Singh And Ors vs Prakash Javedakar And Ors

K.N. Srivastava, Member (A)

This Contempt Petition is filed for alleged non-compliance of our Order dated 05.04.2017 in OA 2762/2016 and Order dated 20.11.2017 in RA 131/2017 in OA 2763/2016 and in RA 132/2017 in OA 2762/2016. In our Order dated 05.04.2017, we had issued the following directions:-

"3. We, therefore, dispose of this application with a direction to the respondents to consider the case of the applicants in the light of the decisions cited above. The respondents shall take a final decision in their cases within 90 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and if the applicants are found to be entitled, the benefit of GPF Pension Scheme may be granted to them, in accordance with law. If not, the respondents shall pass a speaking and reasoned order with intimation to the applicants within the said 90 days period."

Further vide Order dated 20.11.2017 in the said RAs, the following direction was issued which reads as under:-

"3. It is stated that as a matter of fact, the reference to OAs is incorrect and it should have been order dated 24.08.2016 passed in LPA No. 410/2014 and other connected matters. The other side concedes to this position."

Shri Rajappa, learned counsel for the respondents, submitted that both the Orders of the Tribunal have been complied with and consequential individual orders in respect of every applicant have been passed. He has also placed on record a copy of all such orders.

Shri Bhardwaj, learned counsel for the petitioners, however, submitted that compliance reported by Shri Rajappa is not strictly in terms of the Order dated 20.11.2017 in ibid RAs wherein specific direction was issued that the compliance has to be by taking into account the Order in LPA No.410/2014.

Shri Rajappa drew our attention to letter dated 21.5.2018 from Assistant Commissioner (Law), Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan, addressed to him wherein it is clearly indicated that the individual orders in respect of the petitioners are in compliance of the Tribunal's Order dated 5.4.2017 and 20.11.2017. By implication, it would mean that the directions in LPA 410/2014 have also been kept in mind while passing the individual orders.

In this view of the matter, we are satisfied that our order has been substantially complied with. Accordingly, we direct closure of the Contempt Petition. Notices issued to the respondents are discharged.

In case the petitioners are still aggrieved by the orders passed by the respondents in their individual cases, they are at liberty to seek appropriate remedy as available to them under law.