High CourtsSingle Bench

Karma Minz vs State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand High Court · Decided on 11 November 2016 · Citation: (2017) 1 JBCJ 462

HON’BLE JUDGES
Aparesh Kumar Singh, J.
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 — Section 12
RESULT
Disposed Off
CASE NUMBER
Cont. Case(Civil) No. 519 of 2015
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

9 paragraphs · 589 words

Aparesh Kumar Singh, J.—This Court after consideration of the show cause filed earlier passed the following order on 16.9.2016:-

"The order has not been complied with in its letter and spirit as is also evident from perusal of Annexure-B, letter dated 16th May, 2016 addressed to the office of Accountant General, Jharkhand in respect of sanction of provisional pension/gratuity in favour of the petitioner. Complete papers some of which related to the service in Bihar do not appear to have been sent to the office of the Accountant General".

Opposite parties are, therefore, required to comply with the order in its letter and spirit, failing which on the next date the Joint Secretary, School Education and Literacy Department, Government of Jharkhand; author of the letter dated 16th May, 2016 (Annexure-B) shall have to appear in person. Let him be also impleaded as opposite party no.3 in the present case by carrying out necessary correction in the array of opposite parties during course of the day.

Matter is accordingly adjourned for three weeks to ensure full compliance of the order".

2.

A supplementary show cause has been filed by the Opposite Party no.3 on 22.9.2016 there after. Learned counsel for the opposite parties submits that after obtaining the revised service history from the counter part authorities of Bihar, the same has been sent to the office of Accountant General, Jharkhand vide letter dated 31.5.2016 bearing memo no. 272 of the Planning cum Finance Department, Jharkhand. The revised service history of the petitioner has again been sent the office of Accountant General, Jharkhand vide memo no. 309 dated 29.9.2016 (Annexure-A). The admissible post retirement dues under the head of Group Insurance, G.P.F and Leave Encashment have earlier been paid. No Dues Certificate has been issued by the District Superintendent of Education, Latehar bearing letter no. 1744 dated 26.9.2016 addressed to the Joint Secretary, School Education and Literacy Department, Government of Jharkhand (Annexure-C), which has been sent to the Accountant General, Jharkhand through letter dated 29.9.2016. It is submitted that now the authority slip for payment of pension and gratuity is to be issued by the Office of Accountant General, Jharkhand as per the communication at Annexure-A bearing no. 309 dated 29.9.2016. Therefore the opposite parties have complied with the order.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the release of pension/ gratuity may still be delayed and fruits of the order under offence may not immediately flow to the petitioner. The fixation of final pension and gratuity may also entail revision in other post retirement dues paid in part earlier.

4.

Having considered the submission of the learned counsel for the parties and the supplementary show cause filed, this Court is of the opinion that the order under offence has been complied with. If the authority slip has not yet been issued on behalf of Accountant General, it is open for the petitioner to approach the office of Accountant General for release of the same. If the final fixation of pension/ gratuity entails any revision in other post retirement benefits, petitioner may approach the competent authority for the said purpose.

5.

Learned counsel for the petitioner seeks liberty to assail part of the order dated 30.3.2016 bearing letter no. 247 issued by the Joint Secretary, School Education and Literacy Department, Government of Jharkhand upon remand by this Court where under certain punishment has again been imposed against him.

6.

Petitioner is at liberty to do so in an appropriate proceedings. The contempt petition is disposed of and proceedings are dropped.