Kalpna & ORS v. Kulwant Singh Baath & ORS

$~18 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CONT.CAS(C) 556/2016 KALPNA & ORS ..... Petitioners Through:

Mr. Sudhir Gupta, Adv.

versus KULWANT SINGH BAATH & ORS ..... Respondents Through:

Mr. Jasmeet Singh, Adv.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO

O R D E R

% 14.03.2018 The only grievance of the petitioners in this petition is that travelling allowance has not been paid by the respondents. The Ld. Counsel for the petitioners concedes to the fact that interest as awarded by the court has been paid by the respondents.

Mr. Jasmeet Singh, learned counsel appearing for the respondents has drawn my attention to two orders both dated June 12, 2017 (pages 46 and 51 of the paper book) to contend that amounts of Rs.6,52,305/- and Rs.8,36,014/- encompassing the travelling allowance have been paid to the petitioners. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners state, he has no instructions in this regard.

Be that as it may, it appears that in terms of orders dated June 12, 2017, the travelling allowance has since been paid to the petitioners. To that extent, the order has been complied with.

If the petitioners have any grievance with regard to the computation

of the travelling allowance as well as the benefits under the 6th Pay Commission, liberty is with the petitioners to seek such remedy as available in law. It goes without saying, if the grievance of the petitioners still subsists with regard to the directions given in the order of which noncompliance has been alleged, liberty is with the petitioners to revive this contempt petition.

The contempt petition is closed. Notices are discharged. V. KAMESWAR RAO, J MARCH 14, 2018/jg