Gujarat High Court
Vanshgopal Rameshvar Pal vs Pankaj Kumar on 5 January, 2021
Bench: Mr. Justice Nath, Ashutosh J. Shastri
C/MCA/854/2020 ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/MISC. CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 854 of 2020
In
R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 1118 of 2019
==========================================================
VANSHGOPAL RAMESHVAR PAL
Versus
PANKAJ KUMAR
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR JAYANT P BHATT(169) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR JEET J BHATT(6154) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
for the Opponent(s) No. 1,2,3
==========================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. JUSTICE VIKRAM
NATH
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH J. SHASTRI
Date : 05/01/2021
ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
MR. JUSTICE VIKRAM NATH)
1 Heard Shri Jayant Bhatt, learned counsel for the
applicant.
2 Issue notice returnable on 12.02.2021.
3 A group of writ petitions came to be allowed by
learned Single Judge vide judgment dated 13.07.2018.
Operative portion of the judgment dated 13.07.2018 is
reproduced below:
"22. As a result of foregoing discussions, these
petitions are partly allowed. Petitioners are ordered
C/MCA/854/2020 ORDER
to be treated as voluntary retired in place of
dismissal. The petitioners will be treated to have
retired from service. They will be entitled to pension
and other pensionary benefits from that date, but
they will not be paid any arrears for the
aforementioned period I.e. from the date of
retirement till the decision by this Court. However,
they will be entitled to full pension after this date
i.e. decision of this Court. Rule is made absolute to
the aforesaid extent in all these petitions."
4 The State Government preferred a group of Letters
Patent Appeals against the judgment of the learned
Single Judge and the Division Bench vide judgment dated
07.05.2019 partly allowed the appeals and granted some
benefit to the State by providing that only 50% of the
pension would be admissible. Operative portion of the
judgment dated 07.05.2019 is reproduced below:
"The appeals are partly allowed. The respondents -
original petitioners will be treated to have
voluntarily retired from service from the date of the
order of dismissal. They will be entitled to pension
at 50% of the receivable amount. Such amount of
pension @ 50% of the receivable amount shall be
payable to the respective respondents from the date
of the judgment of the learned Single Judge I.e.
13.07.2018 or the date of their respective
superannuation, whichever is later. The other
pensionary benefits shall also be payable to the
respondents, accordingly. However, the respondents
shall not be entitled to be paid any arrears for the
aforementioned period I.e. from the date of their
dismissal (now considered as voluntary retirement)
till the date of decision of this Court or their
respective date of superannuation, whichever is
later. Civil Applications (For Stay) are also
accordingly disposed of."
C/MCA/854/2020 ORDER
5 According to Shri Bhatt, learned counsel for the
applicant, the retired employees approached the Supreme
Court against the judgment of the Division Bench and the
said SLP was dismissed. It is also submitted by him that
to the best of his knowledge and knowledge of the
applicant, till date, the State has not preferred SLP
before the Supreme Court.
6 By means of the present contempt application, it has
been alleged that despite more than 1½ years has passed
since the Division Bench decided the appeals of the State,
the benefits accrued to the applicants except the payment
of pension have still not been extended and as such the
opposite parties are in gross contempt.
7 Prima facie case of non-compliance is made out. It
would thus be open for the opposite parties to ensure
compliance in the meantime and file an affidavit to that
effect failing which the Court will proceed further in the
matter for framing of charges.
(VIKRAM NATH, CJ)
(ASHUTOSH J. SHASTRI, J)
P. SUBRAHMANYAM
