Gujarat High Court
Late Sadhu Chinubhai Sevadas ... vs Pankaj Kumar , Ias on 10 January, 2023
Bench: Niral R. Mehta
C/MCA/1126/2022 ORDER DATED: 10/01/2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/MISC. CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1126 of 2022
In R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 94 of 2018
==========================================================
LATE SADHU CHINUBHAI SEVADAS THROUGH WIDOW SADHU
KUSUMBEN CHINUBHAI
Versus
PANKAJ KUMAR , IAS
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR DHARMESH V SHAH(1050) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MS DRASHTI D SHAH(11443) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MS SHRUTI DHRUV, AGP for the Opponent(s)
DS AFF.NOT FILED (N) for the Opponent(s) No. 1,2,3,4
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.V.ANJARIA
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIRAL R. MEHTA
Date : 10/01/2023
ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.V.ANJARIA)
Heard learned advocate Mr.Dharmesh Shah for the
applicant and learned Assistant Government Pleader
Ms.Shruti Dhruv for the respondents.
2. By filing this Miscellaneous Civil Application under
the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, what is prayed by the
applicant is to require the respondents to purge the contempt.
The allegation is that respondents have willfully and
deliberately disobeyed the order dated 02 nd May, 2019 passed
in Letters Patent Appeal No.94 of 2018.
2.1 In the said Letters Patent Appeal, judgment and
order of learned Single Judge dated 29th June, 2017 was under
challenge, in which operative part of the directions issued by
C/MCA/1126/2022 ORDER DATED: 10/01/2023
the learned Single Judge read as under.
"33. In view of the above, all the petitions succeed in
part and are hereby partly allowed. The respondent
authority is directed to reconsider the grant of the benefit
of the pension scheme to all the petitioners in view of the
Government Resolution dated 15th October, 1984 from the
date of their respective retirement along with the interest
at the rate of 9% per annum on the condition that all the
petitioners shall refund/repay the amount of C.P.F at the
rate of 12% to the authority concerned. Let this exercise be
undertaken by the State Government at the earliest bearing
in mind the observations made by this Court and pass a
fresh order within a period of three months from the date of
the receipt of the writ of this judgment and order."
2.2 While disposing of the Letters Patent Appeal to as
such conform the judgment and order of the learned Single
Judge, the Letters Patent Bench directed as under.
"15. For the aforesaid reasons, the judgements
rendered by the learned Single Judges in the respective
Letters Patent Appeals are confirmed. The State authorities
are directed to grant the benefit of the pension scheme to
all the respondents in view of the Government Resolution
dated 15.10.1984 from the date of their respective
retirement. The respondents who have not refunded/repaid
the amount of Contributory Provident Fund, their case be
considered by the authorities by paying the amount of
pension after adjusting/setting off the amount of
Contributory Provident Fund payable by the respondents. In
case of the respondents who have refunded/repaid the
amount of Contributory Provident Fund, they shall be
entitled for interest at the rate of 9% per annum on the
amount of pension from the date of their repaying/refunding
the amount of Contributory Provident Fund. The respective
parties shall act upon these directions and implement the
same within 8 weeks from the date of receipt of the writ of
the order of this Court. Appeals are accordingly dismissed.
Civil Applications also stand disposed of accordingly."
2.3 Recounting the aforesaid directions issued by the
Letters Patent Bench, the State authorities were directed to
grant benefit of pension scheme to the respondents -
including the applicant herein, in view of Resolution of the
C/MCA/1126/2022 ORDER DATED: 10/01/2023
Government dated 15th October, 1984 from the date of
retirement. The following directions were issued by the
Division Bench modifying the directions of learned Single
Judge.
(i) Those who have not refunded the contributory fund
amount, their case was directed to be considered by the
authority by paying the amount of pension after adjusting the
contributory fund payable;
(ii) The other category was of those respondents -
employees who have refunded the amount of contributory
fund. They are held entitled as per the directions of the
Division Bench to earn interest at the rate of 9% p.a. on the
amount of pension.
3. There is no gainsaying that the applicant herein did
not refund the contributory fund amount. It was liable to be
therefore adjusted in view of aforementioned directions.
4. In the course of hearing today, learned Assistant
Government Pleader produces copy of Pension Payment Order
dated 17th November, 2022 evidencing the payment of pension
and compliance of the order of the Division Bench in that
regard. The said order is taken on record.
4.1 The said order reflects in its footnote that, "Total
amount of recovery is Rs. 1488018/-, Bifurcation of recovery
Amount Rs. 1488018/-, CPF Recovery is Rs. 1128662/-, DCRG
Recovery Rs. 350000/- and 3 month salary recovery Amount is
Rs. 9356/- all Amount should be adjusted against the amount
C/MCA/1126/2022 ORDER DATED: 10/01/2023
of DCRG and pension payable to pensioner.".
4.2 Thus while fixing pension, the amount of
contributory fund has been adjusted. Learned Assistant
Government Pleader stated that the applicant had not
refunded the amount. Therefore, as per the directions of the
Division Bench, the amount has been adjusted while fixing the
pension.
5. Learned advocate for the applicant therefore
submitted only in vain that the order is breached of as the
interest at the rate of 9% is not calculated and not paid on the
amount of pension.
6. It is quite clear from the aforesaid direction, and
when it is not disputed that amount of contributory fund was
not refunded, it was to be adjusted and the applicant would
not become entitle to any interest calculation in his favour.
7. We do not find any further survivability in the
present proceedings of contempt. They are closed. Notice is
discharged.
(N.V.ANJARIA, J)
(NIRAL R. MEHTA,J)
ANUP
