Avadh Ram Pandey v. Dr. Kamal Preet Singh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Contempt Case (C) No. 892 of 2018

1. Avadh Ram Pandey S/o Shri Rishiram Pandey Aged About 72 Years R/o New Adarsh Nagar, Zone 1, Street No. 1, Plot No. 39, Borsi Road, Durg, District : Durg, Chhattisgarh ---- Applicant

Versus

1. Dr. Kamal Preet Singh, President / Secretary, Finance Department Government Of Chhattisgarh

2. Smt. Shikha Rajput Tiwari, Member / Commissioner, Treasury, Accounts And Pension

3. Shri Manish Kumar Thakur, Member, Additional Secretary, Law Department

4. Shri Alok Kumar Joshi, Member, Senior Deputy Account General ( Funds )

5. Shri Manoj Kumar Pingua, Member Secretary, Additional Secretary, General Administration Department, Government Of Chhattisgarh. All Above The High Power Retiral Dues Committee, Pagariya Complex, Pandri Raipur, District: Raipur Chhattisgarh. New Address Zero Point, Baloda Bazar Road, Vidhan Sabha Bhawan, Mandar Road, Raipur, Chhattisgarh

6. Shri Surendra Kumar Jaiswal, Member Secretary, Additional Secretary, General Administration Department, Government Of Chhattisgarh, Atal Nagar, Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh ---Respondents For Applicant :

Mr. Jitendra Gupta, Advocate For Respondents :

Mr. Ashwani Shukla, Advocate For Respondent No.2 :

Mr. Gagan Tiwari, Dy. Govt. Advocate on behalf of Mr. Harshwardhan Parganiha, Advocate

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 07.01.2020

1. The present contempt petition has been filed alleging non-compliance of the Order dated 22.03.2018 passed in WPS No. 1812 of 2012.

2. The respondents have now entered appearance and have filed their reply and alongwith the reply, they have enclosed a document Annexure R-2/1 dated 06.08.2019. The said document shows that the claim of the applicant/petitioner was reconsidered by the concerned authorities and have held that the petitioner/applicant is not entitled for the relief as claimed for.

3. Given the said facts that the respondents have now taken a decision on the claim/case of the petitioner vide order dated 06.08.2019, this Court is of the view that the order/direction passed by this Court stands duly complied-with.

4. If at all, if the petitioner/applicant is not satisfied with the said finding given by the Committee, the only recourse available to the applicant/petitioner would be to challenge the same afresh by way of a fresh proceeding. The veracity of the said order cannot be tested under the contempt jurisdiction of this Court when the direction of this Court was only to consider and pass an appropriate order.

5. Reserving the right of the applicant/petitioner for challenging the same, if he so wants. The present Contempt Petition stands disposed-off. Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge Rahul