Sukhdev Singh vs Dr. Sandeep Bhatnagar

Sandeep Sharma, J

By way of present petition filed under S.17 of Administrative Tribunals Act read with Art. 215 of the Constitution of India, prayer has been made on behalf of the petitioner for initiation of contempt proceedings against the respondent for having willfully and intentionally violated order dated 11.8.2017 passed by erstwhile Himachal Pradesh Administrative Tribunal in OA No. 3879 of 2017, titled as Sukhdev Singh vs. HRTC and others, whereby learned Tribunal below, having taken note of the statement of learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner that his case is squarely covered by judgment dated 17.7.2014 rendered by Hon'ble High Court of Himachal Pradesh in CWP No. 3050 of 2014, titled Nek Ram vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and others, directed the respondent to extend the benefit of aforesaid order to the petitioners, if on verification, petitioner is found to be similarly situate, within three months, from the date of production of a certified copy of order. Since no action, whatsoever, came to be taken by the respondent, pursuant to aforesaid order, petitioner has instituted present proceedings, praying therein for appropriate action against the respondent.

Learned Counsel appearing for the respondent, while placing on record order dated 31.10.2018 , contends that entire benefits in terms of judgment rendered by this Court in Nek Ram (supra) stand released to the petitioner, save and except DCRG. Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner, while acknowledging the factum with regard to release of pensionary benefits, contends that more than three years have passed after passing of order by erstwhile Himachal Pradesh Administrative Tribunal but till date, DCRG has not been paid to the petitioner. Learned Counsel appearing for the respondent, on instructions, undertakes that the amount of DCRG, if not paid, shall be paid within four weeks from today.

Having taken note of the fair stand adopted by learned counsel for the respondent, this Court sees no reason to keep the present proceedings alive and same are closed with a direction to the respondent to do the needful, if not already done, in terms of order alleged to have been violated, within a period of four weeks from today. Needless to say, petitioner shall be at liberty to get the present petition revived, in case, respondent fails to comply with the order in question, so that appropriate action is taken against the erring officials. Notice issued to the respondent is discharged.