Raghuveer Prasad Vishwakarma v. Jayant Pawar, Engineer-In-Chief

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR CONT No. 777 of 2020 • Raghuveer Prasad Vishwakarma S/o Late Shri N. P. Vishwakarma Aged About 63 Years R/o Ganga Nagar, Sector-2, Bilaspur, P. S. Civil Line, Tahsil And District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. Jayant Pawar, Engineer-In-Chief Water Resources Department, Shivnath Bhawan, Sector-19, P. S. And P. O. Rakhi, Atal Nagar, New Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh

2. C. L. Dhakad Executive Engineer, O/o Executive Engineer, Water Resources Division, Korba District Korba Chhattisgarh,

3. Rajesh Dhawankar Executive Engineer, O/o Executive Engineer, Water Resources Division, Raigarh, District Raigarh Chhattisgarh,

4. N.S. Raj Executive Engineer, O/o Executive Engineer, Water Resources Division, Mungeli, District Mungeli Chhattisgarh, ---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Ms. Deepika Sannat, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri Order On Board 19.10.2020

1. Heard

2. The following effective order was passed by this Court on 21.05.2020 in WPS No. 1891/2020 :- "1.The petitioner who was working as Assistant Engineer in Water Resources Department has retired from service on 30.04.2019. The grievance of the petitioner is that despite his retirement, he has not received the amounts of GIS & Travelling Allowances

due to him. It is submitted that the petitioner has submitted a representation to the Executive Engineer, Water Resources Department, Division Korba and the same may be directed to be decided.

2.A perusal of Annexure P-1 shows that the petitioner already stands retired on 30.04.2019. Further after perusal of representations (Annexure P-2 & P-3) submitted before the Executive Engineer, Water Resources Department, Raigarh (C.G) and Executive Engineer, Mungeli and Executive Engineer, Water Resources Department, if the retiral dues like GIS and other dues of Travelling Allowances for the years 2009-2010, 2012 to 214 still remains unpaid, then the same may be disbursed the petitioner after taking into account without any further delay. Therefore, the petitioner is given liberty to make a fresh detailed representation to Respondents 2 & 3 along with a copy of this order within a period of 30 days ventilating all the grievances and if such a representation is filed, the same will be considered and decided by the concerned authorities within a further period of 90 days from the date of receipt of such representation. 3.With the above observation/direction, this writ petition stands disposed off."

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the representation though have been decided but the amounts of GIS & Travelling Allowances, which were due to the petitioner, has not been released yet therefore, contempt is made out.

4. Perusal of the order dated 21.05.2020 would show that the direction

was given to decide the representation of the petitioner. Since categorical statement has been made that the representation has been decided but the amounts have not been released, therefore the petitioner, if aggrieved, may avail the appropriate remedy available to him under the law. In view of this, since the representation having been decided, no deliberate disobedience of the order has been made out and no contempt is committed.

5. Accordingly, this contempt petition stands dismissed. Sd/- (Goutam Bhaduri) Judge Vishakha