High CourtsSingle Bench

Pratap Singh Rana vs Masoom Ali Sarwar & Another

Uttarakhand High Court · Decided on 25 May 2021 · Citation: (2021) 05 UK CK 0067

HON’BLE JUDGES
Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Contempt Petition No. 424 Of 2020
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

12 paragraphs · 252 words

Manoj Kumar Tiwari

1.

Writ Petition (S/S) No. 2103 of 2017 filed by the petitioner, claiming gratuity, earned leave, arrears of fifth pay commission and other retiral dues,

was disposed of by the Writ Court in terms of judgment rendered in Writ Petition (S/S) No. 738 of 2014.

2.

In this Contempt Petition, petitioner has alleged that the order passed by Writ Court, has been violated.

3.

On 21.05.2021, Mr. Ashish Joshi, learned counsel appearing for respondent no. 1 had made a statement that a sum of Rs. 5,30,543/- has been

credited in the account of the petitioner through RTGS on 20.05.2021 and thus, all his retiral dues have been paid. Mr. Harendra Belwal, learned

counsel appearing for the petitioner sought some time to get instructions in the matter regarding payment of the outstanding dues.

4.

Today, on instructions, Mr. Harendra Belwal, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that as per instructions given to him by his client,

the statement made by Mr. Ashish Joshi on 21.05.2021, is correct and the amount, as indicated by Mr. Ashish Joshi, has been paid to the petitioner.

5.

Since the payment of the retiral dues has been made to the petitioner, therefore, no case for proceeding under Contempt of Courts Act is made out.

6.

Accordingly, contempt petition is closed. Contempt notices issued to opposite parties are hereby discharged. However, petitioner shall be at liberty

to approach the appropriate forum, if there is any shortfall in the amount paid to him, as retiral dues.