L.K. Ladiya v. Shri Prashant Lal

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Contempt Case (C) NO. 488 OF 2018 L.K. Ladiya S/o Late Shri Bhagwati Prasad Aged About 62 Years Retired Government Employee At Assistant Engineer/sub Divisional Officer, Jonk Canal Water Resources Sub Division, Girod, District BalodabazarBhatapara, Chhattisgarh, R/o Nvc 21, Narmada Vihar, Yadunandan Nagar, Tifra, Tahsil And District Bilaspur, Civil And Revenue District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh.

...Petitioner(s)

Versus

1. Shri Prashant Lal Divisional Joint Director, Treasury Account And Pension Ghadi Chauk, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

2. Shri F.H.Khan Executive Engineer, Water Resources Construction Division Kasdol, District Balodabazar-Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner :

Shri Manoj Kumar Sinha, Advocate.

For Respondent No.1 :

Shri Pawan Shrivastava, Advocate.

For Respondent No.2 :

Shri UKS Chandel, Advocate.

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 23.07.2018 1.

The present contempt petition has been filed alleging willful non compliance of the order dated 14.03.2018 passed by this court in WPS No.1200 of 2018.

2.

The respondent No.2 have come up with a stand that they have complied with the order to the extent that a sum of Rs.1,52,448/- i.e. balance amount of gratuity to the tune of Rs.5,47,688/- has been released to the petitioner which is not disputed by the petitioner. So far as respondent No.1 is concerned, he has come up with a stand that the petitioner has already been released with the anticipatory pension and other retiral dues have also been paid to the petitioner except of the gratuity amount.

3.

Given the aforesaid substantial compliance of the order by the respondents so far as releasing gratuity amount is concerned, this court is of the opinion that nothing further remains to be adjudicated upon in the present petition. Therefore, this contempt petition is dropped against the respondents. However, the petitioner is at liberty to assail any subsequent development by way of fresh proceedings. The respondents are directed to ensure that the petitioner, if he is not intimated so far as compliance part of the order is concerned, be intimated suitably giving the details how compliance has been done.

4.

Accordingly, the contempt petition stand disposed of. Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge inder