Rajendra Das Gupta v. Shri Girish Chandra Varma

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR CONT No.90 of 2017.

Rajendra Das Gupta S/o Late Shri P.B.Das, Aged About 40 Years R/o Deendayal Colony, Mangala, P.S. Civil Lines, Tahsil & District Bilaspur, Civil And Revneue District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh.

---Petitioner

Versus

Shri Girish Chandra Varma Managing Trustee, Maharishi Ved Vigyan Vidyapeetham, Registered Trust Having Its Registered Office At A-14, Mohan Industrial Estate, Mathura Road, New Delhi.

---Respondent For Petitioner :

Shri M.K.Sinha, Advocate.

For Respondent :

Shri M.S.Bhatti, Advocate.

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order On Board 28/08/2017

1. The present contempt petition was filed alleging willful non-compliance of order passed by this court on 19/10/2016 in WPL No.206/2016.

2. The counsel appearing for the respondents submits that, the management of the respondents have filed their reply to the contempt petition showing there willingness to comply with the order. Further submits that a cheque to this effect has also been brought to the court of an amount of Rs.1,06,920/- as payment made towards compliance of the provision of section 17-B to the petitioner.

3. At this juncture the counsel for the petitioner submits that, the calculation made by the respondents does not seem to be proper as petitioner was drawing much more salary than what has been accessed by the respondents for calculating the compliance of section 17-B of I.D.Act is concerned.

4. Be that as it may, since the counsel for the respondents have already brought a cheque to be paid to the petitioner as compliance of provision of section 17-B, it reflects that respondents are willing to comply with the order passed by this court on 19/10/2016.

5. As such, no fruitful purpose would be served in keeping the contempt petition pending. However, liberty is reserved to the petitioner to bring it to the notice of the respondents as to what was the actual salary which the petitioner was drawing at the time of removal from service, so that in the event if there is

any difference on the calculation so made by the respondents while making the payment, the same can be rectified.

6. Counsel for the respondents has handed a cheque to the counsel appearing for the respondents. Counsel for the respondents also undertakes that, if the petitioner brings the actual salary that he was drawing at the time of termination to the notice of the respondents, the same shall also be accordingly processed and appropriate remedial steps shall be taken.

7. Contempt petition at this juncture stands disposed off. Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) JUDGE Sumit