Smt. Guddo Bai v. Shri Rajat Bansal Commissioner

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR CONT No. 737 of 2018 • Smt. Guddo Bai W/o Ramu Raksel Aged About 67 Years R/o Behind Video World, Mahdapara, Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

• Shri Rajat Bansal Commissioner Municipal Corporation, Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh • Shri Arun Sahu Commissioner Zone No. 3 Municipal Corporation Raipur, DistrictRaipur, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Shri Uttam Pandey, Advocate For Respondents :

Shri H.B.Agrawal, senior counsel with Shri Pankaj Agrawal, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Order On Board 13/09/2021 Reply has been filed.

Learned counsel appearing for the Corporation prays that they may be granted some time. However, having considered that reply has been filed, in the opinion of this Court, this petition needs to be decided finally. 2.

This contempt petition has been filed alleging willful disobedience of order of this Court on the ground that calculation of pension in respect of the period of service rendered as temporary employee as directed by this Court has not been finalised. 3.

Learned senior counsel appearing for the Corporation submits that in the case of the petitioner, the matter is already in process and there was no intention to flout the order of the order. The matter has been finalised and notice has been issued to the Zonal Commissioner on 16/06/2021 to get the contribution part deposited so that benefit can be extended to the petitioner at the earliest. The writ appeal filed by the Corporation has been disposed off as having been rendered infructuous in view of the statement

made by the parties in that case, copy of which has been placed on record. 4.

Considering the above, this Court is not inclined to proceed further in the matter. However, it is necessary to ensure that the benefit, as intended to be granted to the widow of the deceased class-IV employee, are extended to her at the earliest without any impediment. For this, it is necessary to direct the Commissioner, Municipal Corporation to ensure that the entire exercise which is required to be completed at the level of the Corporation should be completed within thirty days. The petitioner's case for pension shall be forwarded to the Directorate, Corporation after expiry of thirty days. 5.

Furthermore, this Court is inclined to extend the reach of the order passed by this Court even to the authorities of the Directorate of Pension that the pension case of the petitioner shall be finalised within a maximum period of 30 days. It is made clear that if the petitioner ultimately does not get benefit within the stipulated time as directed by this Court, this Court may take strict action against the erring officials of the Municipal Corporation for willful disobedience of the order of this Court.

6.

This contempt petition is accordingly disposed off. Sd/- ( Manindra Mohan Shrivastava ) Judge Deepti