Delhi High Court
Shri Kamla Singh vs Shri P K Gupta Commissioner, North ... on 9 April, 2015
$~14
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Judgment delivered on: 9th April, 2015
+ CONT.CAS(C) 92/2014 & CM Nos.9590/14, 15410/14,
15411/14,18984/14, 20790/14, 17278/14
SHRI KAMLA SINGH ..... Petitioner
Represented by: Mr. Sarvesh Bisaria and
Mr. Prakash Chandra Sharma, Advs.
versus
SHRI P K GUPTA COMMISSIONER, NORTH DELHI
MUNICIPAL CORPORATION ..... Respondent
Represented by: Ms. Prabhsahay Kaur, Adv.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT
SURESH KAIT, J. (Oral)
1. The contempt proceedings are predicated on the alleged
non-compliance of the directions issued by this Court on 11.10.2013
while disposing of writ petition No.4273/2013.
2. I note, vide the aforesaid order, directions were passed as
under:-
"We set aside the order of the Tribunal and direct
the petitioner to claim the amount in question i.e.
Rs.2,78,785/- from the respondent with interest @
9% per annum from the date it became due till
today by adjusting from the arrears of dearness
allowance due to the respondent by calculating the
dues with interest of 9% from the date it was due
till the date of actual payment and pay the balance
to the respondent. If a further amount has to be
claimed from the respondent, the petitioner would
intimate the respondent in that regard within a
period of four weeks and the respondent
accordingly satisfy the said claim within four
weeks thereafter."
3. It is not in dispute that the respondent has recovered the amount
of Rs.2,78,785/- from the petitioner with interest at the rate of 9% per
annum from the date it became due till date of order, i.e., 11.10.2013.
It is also not in dispute that the dearness allowance was adjusted
against the dues due to the petitioner. The interest of 9% has also
been recovered on the dues which were due to the petitioner.
4. The grievance of the petitioner is that the respondent withheld
the dearness allowance from 01.07.1997 till date, whereas vide order
dated 11.10.2013, the Division Bench of this Court directed the
respondent to adjust the amount from the dearness allowance by
calculating 9% interest per annum thereon.
5. The moot question before this Court is that whether this Court
vide order dated 11.10.2013 directed the respondent to pay 9% interest
on the dearness allowance. In para one of the said order, it is recorded
by the Court, the respondent impugned the order dated 07.05.2013 of
the Central Administrative Tribunal passed in OA No.337/2013
whereby the Tribunal had allowed aforementioned OA by directing
the respondent to release the arrears of dearness allowance in pension
along with interest after adjusting the normal licence fee.
6. It is not in dispute that the order passed by the Tribunal has
been set aside. While setting aside the order, this Court recorded the
submission of the counsel for the respondent that the petitioner was in
violation of undertaking given pursuant to orders of the Supreme
Court. He was forcefully evicted from the flat in question on
14.05.2007, which means that for long ten years, the respondent
remained in occupation of the flat. Due to her over stay more needy
persons were denied the benefit of residential accommodation.
Accordingly, the licence fee was required to be claimed by the
respondent in accordance with the rules. Moreover, a very
compassionate view was taken by the respondent/Corporation by
waiving of 50% of damage charges and could have been claimed by
the respondent under the rules. Accordingly, this Court agreed with
the submission of the counsel for the respondent that the respondent
was in violation of the undertaking given pursuant to the order of the
Supreme Court. There was no justifiable reason for him to continue to
occupy the flat even after July 31, 2001. He did not vacate the quarter
voluntarily, however, forcefully evicted his occupation.
7. On perusal of the directions passed by this Court, this Court has
specifically directed that the respondent was entitled to claim the
amount of Rs.2,78,785/- from the petitioner with interest at the rate of
9% per annum from the date it became due till 11.10.2013 by
adjusting from the arrears of dearness allowance, by calculating dues
with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date it was due till
the date of actual payment and pay the balance to the petitioner. Thus,
it is clear from the directions passed by this Court, the respondent was
entitled to recover the interest @ 9% on the amount of Rs.2,78,785/-
and the dues amount as well.
8. In my considered opinion, the Division Bench of this Court vide
order dated 11.10.2013 has not directed that the petitioner was
entitled interest at the rate of 9% per annum on the arrears of dearness
allowance lying with the interest.
9. In view of the above, I am not inclined to pass any order against
the respondent.
10. Accordingly, the petition is disposed of with liberty to the
petitioner, if he is still aggrieved, may seek clarification on this issue
from the concerned Court.
SURESH KAIT, J
APRIL 09, 2015
'sn'/jg
