Mathi Devi vs Prashant Sirkeck

Jyotsna Rewal Dua, J

Following order was passed in the matter on 08.05.2023: -

Civil Writ Petition No.627/2013 filed by the petitioner was allowed by the learned Single Bench with the following directions:

“Accordingly, the Writ Petition is allowed. Annexure P-2 dated 21.8.2012 is quashed and set aside. The petitioner will be deemed to be conferred daily waged status on 1.4.2003 with all consequential benefits. Pending application(s) if any, shall stand disposed of.”

LPA No.26/2016 preferred by the respondent was disposed of on 2.7.2019. The operative part of the judgment is as follows:

“Therefore, extending the benefit to the respondent-workman, the completion of 10 years continuous service in her case has to be taken as 31.12.2003 and as such, she is entitled to conferment of the daily waged status on and w.e.f. 1.1.2004. We, extent.”

The petitioner has alleged violation of the aforesaid judgment.

The stand taken by the respondent in its reply is that daily waged status was conferred upon the petitioner w.e.f. 1.1.2004 alongwith all consequential benefits, vide office order dated 27.5.2020. That in view of the instructions of Finance Department dated 15.12.2011, the back wages/arrears of pay, allowances etc. have been restricted to three years prior to the date of filing of the petition. The respondent has submitted that since the petitioner moved this Court in January, 2013, therefore, all actual monetary benefits admissible to him in order dated 27.5.2020 cannot be released in his favour.

The above stand of the respondent prima facie is not in conformity with the directions issued in the judgment. CWP No.627/2013 instituted by the petitioner was allowed on 11.5.2015. In terms of this judgment, the petitioner was deemed to have been conferred daily waged status on 1.4.2003 with all consequential benefits. No restriction was imposed in the judgment in respect of release of financial benefits. This judgment was modified by the Hon’ble Division Bench only to the extent of grant of benefit to the petitioner w.e.f. 1.1.2004 instead of 1.4.2003. Reliance placed by the respondent upon the instructions of Finance Department dated 15.11.2011, is of no assistance to them. These instructions will not override the judgment passed by this Court. In any event, it is not even the case of the respondent that the procedure in para-5 of the instructions was followed by them or any finding was returned by the Court in that regard. Before proceeding further in the matter, at the persuasive request made by learned counsel for the respondent a week’s time is granted to the respondent to implement the judgment in letter and spirit. At his request, list the matter on 15th May, 2023.”

During the course of hearing today, learned counsel for the respondent has place on record a copy of office communication dated 12.05.2023, whereby, an amount of Rs.54,866/- has been ordered to be remitted to the petitioner. Learned counsel for the respondent states that the said remittance is towards the complete implementation of the judgment dated 11.05.2015 passed in CWP No. 627 of 2013 and dated 02.07.2019 passed in LPA No. 26 of 2016. His statement is taken note of.

In view of the office communication dated 12.05.2023 and the aforesaid submissions made by learned counsel for the respondent that the judgment in question stands implemented in letter and spirit, these contempt proceedings are closed. Notice issued to the respondent is discharged. However, liberty is reserved to the petitioner to seek appropriate remedy in accordance with law at an appropriate stage for the survival of her remaining grievances, if any. The Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.