Narayan Singh Bisht vs Iqbal Ahmad And Another

Sharad Kumar Sharma, J

The petitioner had preferred this Writ Petition, being Writ Petition No.2006 of 2018, Narayan Singh Bisht vs. State of Uttarakhand and others, for number of reliefs as referred therein pertaining to the grant of revised pay-scale and the pensionary benefits and particularly, the reference of the relief may be had from Para 3 of the present Contempt Petition. In the proceedings of the writ, the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court had passed an order on 04.07.2018 to the followings effect:

"Considering the submission advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, it is directed that, till the next date of listing, no recovery in pursuance of the impugned order shall be made from the petitioner.

By the next date of listing, the competent authority shall also pass order for payment of provisional pension of the petitioner.

Stay application (CLMA No. 9272 of 2018) stands disposed of."

By virtue of the interim order dated 04.07.2018, the respondents were restrained from making any recovery in pursuance to the impugned orders; which are under challenge in the Writ Petition. Subsequently, the proceedings of the Writ Petition, further proceeded and the Co-ordinate Bench, yet again proceeded to pass, yet another interim order on 02.04.2019, whereby, the petitioner has pleaded in his miscellaneous application about his financial constrains which he was suffering from, due to non-remittance of the retiral benefits, coupled with the fact that, he had to meet up the expenses of the marriage of his daughter, who was engaged to be married on 18.04.2019. Considering the said financial constrained, the Court passed the following order on 02.04.2019, to the following effect:

"The prayer made, is innocuous, therefore is worth accepting.

Accordingly, the Director, Technical Education, Uttarakhand is directed to calculate the amount of gratuity, computation and leave encashment benefit of the petitioner by treating his grade pay Rs.4200/- and to make payment of the same to the petitioner in accordance with law, as early as possible, preferably on or before 17.04.2019.

Acceptance of retiral benefits by the petitioner on the basis of grade pay of Rs.4200/- will be without prejudice to his rights and contentions."

In fact, the Co-ordinate Bench had passed by an order of 02.04.2019, it had directed the Director Technical Education to calculate the amount of gratuity, commutation and leave encashment benefits which was payable to the petitioner by determining the same on the basis of the grade pay of Rs.4200/- and it was further directed that the payment would be ensured to be made, to the petitioner on or before 17.04.2019. The petitioner contends that seeking an enforcement of the said order, he has submitted his representation along with the certified copy of the order dated 22.04.2019, but, the same was not complied with, accordingly, he filed the present Contempt Petition on 30.05.2019.

On this Contempt Petition, the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court has issued notices to the respondents vide its order dated 01.07.2019. During the intervening period, the grievance of the petitioner; as it has been argued today, is that despite of an order of 02.07.2018, the respondent have still proceeded to make the recovery/deductions from his retiral benefits, by virtue of an order passed on 07.06.2019, he submits that the said act of the respondent of still making the deduction would be in violation of the High Court interim order dated 04.07.2018. These are the fact which is born from the record, but, as far as the Contempt Court are concerned and when they are exercising its jurisdiction under Section 12 of the Act, for the enforcing the judgments, under Section 12, the Contempt jurisdiction would be confined only in relation to the order which the petitioner deliberately alleges to have been not complied by the respondents or flouted by them, which in the instant case happens to be the order dated 02.04.2019. In fact, as on date there is no such contempt drawn by the petitioner alleging non-compliance of the earlier order passed by the High Court on 04.07.2018, hence, his grievance as against the action taken by the respondent on 07.06.2019, of proceeding to make recovery/deductions, cannot be made as a subject matter of scrutiny in the present Contempt Petition, which is confined and passed by the petitioner for non-compliance of the order dated 02.04.2019, as passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court. In such a contingency, it would be always open for the petitioner to seek an appropriate clarification from the Court where the Writ Petition No.2006 of 2018, is pending consideration. So far it relates to the effect of an order dated 04.07.2018, which is not the subject matter of the present contempt proceedings.

In the present Contempt Petition, the respondent had filed a compliance affidavit of respondent no.2, as well as the counter affidavit which has been filed by the respondent no.1. In the compliance affidavit thus, filed by the Principal, Government Polytechnic, in fact, on the directions issued by the respondent no.1 on 01.06.2019, the Principal had made an assertion that in compliance of the directions dated 01.06.2019, all the documents pertaining to the petitioner; with regards to the determination of pension, gratuity, commutation and other retiral benefits have already been forwarded by the Principal to the Sub Treasury Officer, Dwarahat and accordingly, this communication was also intimated to the petitioner by the correspondence of the respondent no.1, whereby, even as per the letter dated 07.06.2019, of Assistant Accountant i.e. the petitioner he was called upon by the Sub Treasury, Dwarahat to place the certain documents on record before him, in order to ensure the compliance of the order dated 02.04.2019. But, in fact, as per the averments made in the compliance affidavit, the petitioner had expressed his in-capacity to appear before the Sub Treasury Officer, Dwarahat, on the pretext that since his Writ Petition is still pending consideration before the High Court he would not appear, and an identical expression has been given in the counter affidavit filed on 29.07.2019 by respondent no.1.

In view of the averments made therein, that the Principal has already forwarded the documents to the Sub Treasury Officer; for its processing for ensuring the remittance of the pension, gratuity and commutation of pension and further that on account of the fact, that the Sub Treasury Officer himself vide his letter No. 321-25 dated 06.06.2019, has called the petitioner to appear before him to complete the necessary formalities and the petitioner himself has chosen not to approach the Sub Treasury Officer, the respondents cannot be said that they after the aforesaid correspondences as has been place on record with the compliance and the counter affidavit, had derelicted in compliance of the order dated 02.04.2019, in that way of the matter, so far as the present Contempt Petition is concerned, in the light of the averments made in the compliance affidavit of respondent no.2, as well as in the counter affidavit filed by the respondent no.1 respectively, this Court is of the opinion that the judgment and the order dated 02.04.2019, as rendered in Writ Petition No.2006 of 2018, Narayan Singh Bisht vs. State of Uttarakhand and others, has been complied with. However, this Court, on this Contempt Petition, would be still reserving the rights of the petitioner to approach the Sub Treasury Officer, for completing the necessary formalities in pursuance to the correspondence made to him by the Sub Treasury Officer himself on 06.06.2019.

Subject to the above observation, the Contempt Petition is closed. Notices issued to the respondents is hereby discharged.