Gurvinder Singh Saini vs Delhi Sikh Gurudwara Management ...
2010 Latest Caselaw 715 Del

     *            IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI


                                                  Date of Reserve: February 02, 2009
                                                     Date of Order: February 08, 2010
+ Cont Cas(C) 1491/2006
%                                                                        08.02.2010
     Gurvidner Singh Saini                                       ...Petitioner
     Through: Mr. Raj Kumar Sherawat, Advocate

         Versus

         Delhi Sikh Gurudwara Management
         Committee & Ors.                                  ...Respondents
         Through:    Mr. Shagum Mehta and Mr. Jagjit Singh Chhabra, Advocate for
                     R-3

AND

+ Cont Cas(C) 673/2008
%
     S. Gurvidner Singh Saini                                    ...Petitioner
     Through: Mr. Raj Kumar Sherawat, Advocate

         Versus

         Surinder Paul Singh Oberoi                              ...Respondent
         Through: Mr. Jagjit Singh Chhabra, Advocate


         JUSTICE SHIV NARAYAN DHINGRA

1.       Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

2.       To be referred to the reporter or not?

3.       Whether judgment should be reported in Digest?


         JUDGMENT

1. By this order, I shall dispose of the above two contempt petitions preferred by

the petitioner for violation orders dated 12th July 2006 and 3rd October 2008 passed

by this Court. Vide order of which contempt is alleged this Court observed that the

petitioner was entitled to a scale of Rs.5500-175-9000 from the date of his

appointment and he was entitled to draw increment and other benefits according to

the scale of pay. Directions were also given that the petitioner be paid his dues

according to the judgment.

Cont Cas(C) 673/08 & 1491.06 Page 1 Of 3

2. The litigation between the parties continued thereafter also. A review and an

LPA were also preferred. An LPA was also filed in another case pending between the

parties. During pendency of LPA No.294 of 2008, parties entered into a compromise

which was placed before the Division Bench of this court. This compromise recorded

the terms of settlement and was signed by the petitioner and by the respondent

management. The terms of compromise read as under:

"1. That the appellant has accepted Rs.1,70,000/- (Rupees one lac and seventy thousand only) towards back-wages with continuity of service from December 2006 to August 2008. The School Management shall pay the aforesaid amount to the appellant in 10 installments of th Rs.17,000/- each on or before 10 of each month along with salary.

2. That School Management shall pay salary to the th appellant in terms of judgment dated 12 July, 2006 passed in W.P(C) No.18084 of 2005 from September, 2008 onwards without prejudice to rights of the parties and subject to outcome of Review Petition No.37 of 2007. The parties are willing for early disposal of Review Petition.

3. In terms of this compromise, the petitioner was paid an amount of

Rs.1,53,000/- vide cheque dated 20th May, 2009. The other amounts were also paid

to the petitioner in terms of compromise. The petitioner, however, continued with

the present contempt petitions despite entering into the compromise with the

respondent.

4. I consider that even after passing an order or directions by the Court, the

parties are at liberty to settle the subject matter of the disputes by way of

settlement and once the settlement is arrived at between the parties, same is

binding on the parties and if the terms of settlement are honoured, no contempt

Cont Cas(C) 673/08 & 1491.06 Page 2 Of 3 would lie against the respondent. In the present case, the terms of compromise were

honoured and the amount in terms thereof was paid to the petitioner. In my view, no

contempt was made out against the respondent. Both above contempt petitions

stand dismissed. No orders as to costs.

February 08, 2010                              SHIV NARAYAN DHINGRA J.
rd




Cont Cas(C) 673/08 & 1491.06                                        Page 3 Of 3