______________________________________________________________________ vs Smt. Kumad Singh & Another
2021 Latest Caselaw 1321 HP

           IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH,
                           SHIMLA

                                                                         COPC No.243 of 2020




                                                                                     .
                                                           Date of Decision: 25.02.2021





    ______________________________________________________________________
    Bhadur Singh                                                                        .....Petitioner





                                         Versus


    Smt. Kumad Singh & another                                                          ..... Respondents
    ______________________________________________________________________





    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge.
    Whether approved for reporting? 1

    For the Petitioner                    : Mr. Om Parkash Goel, Advocate.

    For the Respondents                   : Mr. Naresh Kaul , Advocate.

    Sandeep Sharma, Judge (oral):

By way of present Contempt Petition, prayer has been

made on behalf of the petitioner for initiation of contempt proceedings

against the respondents for having intentionally and deliberately

disobeyed the judgment dated 30.7.2020, passed by Division Bench of

this Court in CWP No.2579 of 2020, titled as Bhadur Singh versus

H.P.T.D.C & another.

2. Careful perusal of aforesaid judgment, alleged to have

been violated, (Annexure C-1), reveals that Division Bench of this

Court while disposing of the petition, directed the respondents to

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

release the admissible retiral benefits in accordance with law. It was

further directed by Division Bench of this Court that 50% of such

benefits be released within two weeks from the date of the judgment

.

and the remaining amount alongwith statutory interest be released

within two months thereafter. Since despite there being specific

direction to do the needful, as taken note above, respondents have

failed to release the retiral benefits to the petitioner, he has

approached this Court in the instant proceedings.

3. Mr. Naresh Kaul, learned counsel representing the

respondents while accepting notice on behalf of the respondents states

that though he has every reason to believe and presume that by now

aforesaid judgment alleged to have been violated, must have been

complied with, but if not, same would be complied with within a

period of four weeks from today.

4. Consequently, in view of the fair statement made by

learned counsel representing the respondents, this Court sees no

reason to keep the present petition alive and as such, same is

accordingly disposed of with the direction to the respondents to do the

needful within a period of four weeks, if not already done, failing

which, they would further aggravate the contempt. Petitioner is at

liberty to get the present proceedings revived in case aforesaid

judgment is not complied with, so that appropriate action, in

accordance with law is taken against erring official. Notices issued to

the respondents are hereby discharged accordingly.

.

                                                      (Sandeep Sharma),





                                                           Judge
    25th February,2021
        (shankar)




                    r           to