Vashishtha Narayan Singh v. Shaibala Martin

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CONT No. 838 of 2018 Vashishtha Narayan Singh S/o Late Shri Baleshwar Singh Aged About 66 Years Driver, Ambikapur Depot, R/o Nawapara Near Church Dehat, P.S. Gandhi Nagar, Ambikapur, District Surguja, Chhattisgarh, District : Surguja (Ambikapur), Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

Shaibala Martin Managing Director, M.P. Road Transport Corporation, H.O. Habibganj, Bhopal (M.P.) (Contemnor), District : Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh ---- Respondent For Petitioner :

Mr. Vivek Kumar Agrawal, Advocate For Respondent :

Mr. Varun Sharma, Advocate.

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 11/03/2019

1. The present contempt petition has been filed alleging non compliance of the order dated 30/04/2018 in passed in WPS No. 3404/2018. This Court in the said writ petition has directed the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner preferably within a period of two months so far as the grant of relief under Employee Deposit Scheme is concerned.

2. The respondents have entered appearance and filed their reply and in their reply they have categorically stated that the respondents have taken steps for compliance of the order. In the process, they have called for certain records that are available with the CIDC that is the place from where the petitioner has been superannuated.

3. At this juncture, counsel for the petitioner produce the order of coordinate Bench of this Court passed in a bunch of Contempt Petitions dated 01/11/2018. Those contempt petitions were also in respect of identical set of facts. The contempt petitions were disposed off with direction to the respondents to ensure payment payable to the petitioner under Employee Deposit Scheme within a further period of three months. At the same time rights of the petitioners were reserved to approach this Court in case of non compliance of the order within a said stipulated period.

4. In view of the facts that in identical matters, the Co-ordinate Bench has already granted three months time to the respondents for compliance and respondents in their reply in the present Contempt Petition also has shown their eagerness for compliance of the order.

5. At this juncture, this Court is of the opinion that the present contempt petition also can be disposed off under similar terms. Respondents therefore are directed to ensure that the order passed by this Court on 30/04/2018 and taking note of the contents of the reply that has been filed by the respondents, they should make all efforts ensuring compliance of the order within a further period of three months starting from today. It is made clear that the respondents should make sincere efforts in ensuring that the compliance is done in letter and spirit. Mere making some correspondence from one office to another office would not show any justification for compliance, this Court would view such a stand seriously.

6. Accordingly, the contempt petition stands disposed off reserving the right of the petitioner to approach this Court again in case if need so arises.

Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge Rohit