Uttarakhand High Court
Anil Kant vs Aditya Saha on 10 February, 2026
Author: Alok Kumar Verma
Bench: Alok Kumar Verma
2026:UHC:742
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
AT NAINITAL
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR VERMA
10TH FEBRUARY, 2026
CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 189 of 2023
Anil Kant .....Petitioner
Versus
Aditya Saha, Regional Provident Fund
Commissioner and Another .....Respondents
Counsel for the petitioner : Mr. Piyush Tiwari, Advocate.
Counsel for the Respondent : Mr. Rajesh Sharma, Advocate
No.1
Counsel for the Respondent : Mr. Aditya Pratap Singh, Advocate
No.2
Hon'ble Alok Kumar Verma,J.
The present Contempt Petition has been filed alleging wilful disobedience of an order dated 25.11.2022, passed in Writ Petition (S/S) No.716 of 2020 and batch. By the said order, the following direction was issued :-
" Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, writ petitions are disposed of with a direction to the concerned Regional Provident Fund Commissioner to consider and decide the claim of petitioners, in terms of the judgment rendered by Hon'ble 1 2026:UHC:742 Supreme Court in SLP(C) No.8658-8659 of 2019, within eight weeks from the date of production of certified copy of this order."
2. Heard Mr. Piyush Tiwari, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Rajesh Sharma, learned counsel for the respondent no.1 and Mr. Aditya Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the respondent no.2.
3. In response to the present contempt petition, a compliance affidavit dated 15.12.2025 has been filed by Mr. Dayanidhi Batsa, the Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner, along with documents.
4. Mr. Rajesh Sharma, Advocate appearing for the respondent no.1, submitted that the respondent has highest regards for the order passed by the Court and the respondent always tries to implement the Court's orders in a timely manner with all regard and sincerity. The grievance of the petitioner has already been resolved by issuing revised PPO No.UKHLD00030680 on higher wages. The arrear amount of Rs.9,52,595/- and pension at the rate of Rs.11,112/- has also been released.
5. Mr. Piyush Tiwari, Advocate appearing for the petitioner, submitted that the grievance of the 2 2026:UHC:742 petitioner has been resolved. He does not want to proceed further with the matter.
6. In the facts and circumstances of the case, this Contempt Petition does not require any further consideration, therefore, the proceedings in the present contempt petition are closed.
___________________ ALOK KUMAR VERMA, J.
Date: 10.02.2026 JKJ/Pant 3