High CourtsDivision Bench

P. Purushothama Das vs A. K. Agarwal

High Court Of Kerala · Decided on 8 July 2022 · Citation: (2022) 07 KL CK 0079

HON’BLE JUDGES
Alexander Thomas, J · Murali Purushothaman, J
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Con.Case (C) No.804 of 2022
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

4 paragraphs · 351 words

Alexander Thomas, J

1.

The afore captioned Contempt of Court Case arises out of the non-compliance of the orders and directions rendered by this Court as per Annexure-A judgment dated 8.11.2021 in O.P.(CAT) No.164/2020 arising out of O.A.No.752 of 2017 on the file of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Ernakulam.

2.

Today, when the matter is taken up for consideration, Sri. Daya Sindhu Sreehari, learned Central Government Counsel would submit on the instructions of the respondents that the respondents have already taken administrative decision for fully complying with the directions and orders of this Court in Annexure-A Judgment in favour of the petitioner and further what remains is that the papers will have to be routed through the Manager of the State Bank of India branch through which the pension is to be disbursed and after receiving the approved pension papers by the Branch Manager of the State Bank of India, on receipt of the intimation from the Branch Manager concerned, the applicant will have to fill and submit an undertaking. Once it is submitted and accepted by the Branch Manager of the State Bank of India, after due verification, pension with arrears will be credited to the petitioner's S.B. account maintained in the State Bank of India. We record the above said submissions of the respondents. In view of the said submissions, the Contempt of Court Case need not be kept pending. However, We make it clear that if there is any undue delay for complying with the above undertaking or disbursal of the admissible monitory benefits, then, the petitioner will be at liberty to file an application to re-open the present Contempt of Court case proceedings. The respondents will co-ordinate with the Branch Manager of the State Bank of India concerned to ensure that the formalities are duly completed and also to ensure that the admissible monitory benefits are paid and credited to the S.B account of the petitioner maintained in the branch concerned of the State Bank of India.

With these observations and directions and with the said liberty, the above Contempt of Court case is disposed of .