Allahabad High Court
Swami Deen Vishwakarma vs Rajesh Kumar Srivas Basic Shiksha ... on 20 November, 2017
Bench: Ashwani Kumar Mishra
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 16
Case :- CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 5326 of 2017
Applicant :- Swami Deen Vishwakarma
Opposite Party :- Rajesh Kumar Srivas Basic Shiksha Adhikari
Counsel for Applicant :- Sanjeev Kumar Sharma
Hon'ble Ashwani Kumar Mishra,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant.
It is alleged that the order passed by writ court dated 25.7.2017 in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 32055 of 2017 has not been complied with, despite service of it. Order dated 25.7.2017 reads as Under:-
"No one is present on behalf of the petitioner.
I have perused the assertions made in the writ petition and the documents annexed with the writ petition with the assistance of learned standing counsel appearing on behalf of the first respondent.
The case of the petitioner is that he retired on 30 June 2014 from the post of Head Master in Primary School, Patiyara, Block Sumerpur, District Hamirpur. He filed Writ No. 54718 of 2015 before this Court with the grievance that his retiral benefits were not being paid to him. The writ petition was disposed of by order dated 23 September 2015 with liberty to the petitioner to approach the District Basic Education Officer, Hamirpur, with a certified copy of the order and copy of the representation dated 2 July 2015 and in which event, the same was directed to be decided within two months. According to the petitioner, when the direction given by this Court was not complied with, he was compelled to file Contempt Application No. 7674 of 2015 before this Court. Thereafter, a sum of Rs. 17,56,040/- was paid to him on 14 March 2016 towards retiral benefits. According to the petitioner, certain amount towards departmental insurance and interest has yet not been paid to him and in which regard, he made representation to the District Basic Education Officer on 23 August 2016. Since no heed has been paid to the same, the instant writ petition has been filed.
Having regard to the facts of the case, this Court is of the opinion that interest of justice would be served in directing the second respondent to accord consideration to the grievance of the petitioner. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to approach the second respondent with a certified copy of this order and copy of the representation dated 23 August 2016 (Annexure 7), and in which event, the same shall be decided by the second respondent by means of a speaking order expeditiously, preferably within a period of next three months".
It is contended that the order of the writ court has been served upon the opposite party by registered speed post on 1.8.2017.
In the facts and circumstances of the case, as has been brought on record, prima-facie case of disobedience of order of writ court is made out. However, one more indulgence is allowed to the opposite party to ensure compliance of the order passed by the writ Court.
Office is directed to send a copy of this petition to the opposite party concerned alongwith a copy of this order. It shall keep record of the same. Process fee for the purpose be supplied by the petitioner within a week.
Considering the above, this contempt petition is disposed of with a direction upon the opposite party to comply with the directions issued by the writ court within a period of 6 weeks from the date of presentation of certified copy of this order. Liberty is reserved to the applicant to approach this Court again, in case the order of writ court is still not complied with.
Order Date :- 20.11.2017
n.u.
