Telangana High Court
Mrs. Venu S Agarwal vs Sri Arun Kumar Jain on 16 April, 2024
Author: Surepalli Nanda
Bench: Surepalli Nanda
HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA
CONTEMPT CASE No.276 OF 2024
ORDER:
Complaining the willful violation of the order of this Court dated 16.10.2023 in W.P.No.3044 of 2023 by the respondents, the present contempt case is filed.
2. Operative portion of the order dated 16.10.2023 in W.P.No.3044 of 2023 is extracted hereunder:
"Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, the submission made by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of petitioner as well as respondents and the specific averment made by respondent No.3/The Senior Divisional Commercial Manager at paragraph Nos. 8 and 9 of the Counter affidavit, (referred to and extracted above), that the file has been sent to the Finance Department for arranging refund and the refund process will be completed within a period of two (O2) months and duty taking into consideration the fact as borne on record that the said counter affidavit has been filed in the month of July, 2023, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents to complete the refund process and release the amount due to the petitioner as per the petitioner's lawful entitlement as per the rules in force within a period of one(01) month 2 from the date of receipt of the copy of this order. However, there shall be no order as to costs."
3. Counter affidavit has been filed by the respondents. It is specifically averred at paragraph Nos.9 to 11 of the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents as under:
"9. As alleged by the licensee that no response from administration is not correct as her 1st request termination notice was accepted by the administration. As per the clause the termination notice has to be given 6 months in advance and this office has considered for the closure of the unit with effect from 26.12.2020, which clearly indicates that her request notice for the termination, which she had submitted to this office on 25.06.2020, is ACCEPTED.
As such, her allegation of not responding to the notice is false and incorrect. Further as per the letter, the licensee was advised to vacate the railways premises duly clearing all the dues, if any. As furnished in the counter affidavit para-6, it is submitted that as the refund is pertaining to the non-operation period, this office has sought clarification from head quarters about the refund of the advance license fee paid by the licensees. The copy of the letter to headquarters is enclosed as annexure-12. Accordingly, the licensee 3 was informed vide this office letter dated 23.12.2021, for her representation dated 18.12.2021, copy enclosed as annexure-13. It is submitted that, this office has processed the refund of the security deposit and license fee of the licensee. The security deposit was refunded to the licensee and refunding the license fee was under
process, as the clarification has been sought from the head quarters. This office has taken initiative in the process of refund of the license fee as such it is illegal and arbitrary for the petitioner to file.
10. As stated above it is submitted that as the refund is pertaining to the non-operation period, this office has sought clarification from headquarters about the refund of the advance license fee paid by the licensees. Accordingly, the licensee was informed vide this office letter dated 23.12.2021, for her representation dated 18.12.2021.
11. It is submitted that, this office has processed the refund of the security deposit and license fee of the licensee. The security deposit was refunded to the licensee and refunding the license fee was under process, as the clarification has been sought from the head quarters. This office has taken initiative in the process of refund of the license fee as such it is illegal and arbitrary for the petitioner to file the present contempt case.4
4. Learned counsel representing the Deputy Solicitor General of India also brings on record the proceedings dated 20.11.2023 and the same is extracted hereinunder:
"As per Hon'ble High Court of Telangana's Judgment (W.P.No.3044 of 2023) orders, an amount of Rs.3,74,135/- has been refunded through NEFT to your A/c.No.52076121090, at State Bank of India/Raichur Branch, as confirmed by Sr.DFM/GTL vide letter cited above reference
2. May kindly ensure the receipt of the payment of Rs.3,74,135/- (Rupees three lakhs seventy four thousand one hundred and thirty five only) and confirm this office for further course of action."
5. Learned counsel representing the Deputy Solicitor General of India submits that the order of this Court dated 16.10.2023 in W.P.No.3044 of 2023 has been complied with and the contempt needs to be closed.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner, however, submits that the petitioner is entitled for more amounts than what has been released to the petitioner as refundable amount. This Court opines that the same cannot be considered under contempt jurisdiction.
5
7. Taking into consideration the averments made in the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents at paragraph Nos.9 to 11 (referred to extracted above) and also the contents of the proceedings dated 20.11.2023 (referred to extracted above), the contempt case is closed giving liberty to the petitioner to avail the remedies as are available under law. However, in the circumstances of the case, there shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in the writ petition shall also stand closed.
___________________________ MRS JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA Date: 16-04-2024 Lpd 6 HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA CONTEMPT CASE NO.276 of 2024 Date: 16.04.2024 Lpd