Telangana High Court
Mrs. Venu S Agarwal vs Sri Arun Kumar Jain on 16 April, 2024
Author: Surepalli Nanda
Bench: Surepalli Nanda
HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA
CONTEMPT CASE No.276 OF 2024
ORDER:
Complaining the willful violation of the order of this Court
dated 16.10.2023 in W.P.No.3044 of 2023 by the respondents,
the present contempt case is filed.
2. Operative portion of the order dated 16.10.2023 in
W.P.No.3044 of 2023 is extracted hereunder:
"Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances
of the case, the submission made by the learned
counsel appearing on behalf of petitioner as well as
respondents and the specific averment made by
respondent No.3/The Senior Divisional Commercial
Manager at paragraph Nos. 8 and 9 of the Counter
affidavit, (referred to and extracted above), that the file
has been sent to the Finance Department for arranging
refund and the refund process will be completed within
a period of two (O2) months and duty taking into
consideration the fact as borne on record that the said
counter affidavit has been filed in the month of July,
2023, the writ petition is disposed of directing the
respondents to complete the refund process and
release the amount due to the petitioner as per
the petitioner's lawful entitlement as per the
rules in force within a period of one(01) month
from the date of receipt of the copy of this order.
However, there shall be no order as to costs."
3. Counter affidavit has been filed by the respondents.
It is specifically averred at paragraph Nos.9 to 11 of the
counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents as
under:
"9. As alleged by the licensee that no response from
administration is not correct as her 1st request
termination notice was accepted by the administration.
As per the clause the termination notice has to be given
6 months in advance and this office has considered for
the closure of the unit with effect from 26.12.2020,
which clearly indicates that her request notice for the
termination, which she had submitted to this office on
25.06.2020, is ACCEPTED.
As such, her allegation of not responding to the
notice is false and incorrect. Further as per the letter,
the licensee was advised to vacate the railways
premises duly clearing all the dues, if any. As furnished
in the counter affidavit para-6, it is submitted that as
the refund is pertaining to the non-operation period,
this office has sought clarification from head quarters
about the refund of the advance license fee paid by the
licensees. The copy of the letter to headquarters is
enclosed as annexure-12. Accordingly, the licensee
was informed vide this office letter dated 23.12.2021,
for her representation dated 18.12.2021, copy enclosed
as annexure-13. It is submitted that, this office has
processed the refund of the security deposit and license
fee of the licensee. The security deposit was refunded
to the licensee and refunding the license fee was under
process, as the clarification has been sought from the
head quarters. This office has taken initiative in the
process of refund of the license fee as such it is illegal
and arbitrary for the petitioner to file.
10. As stated above it is submitted that as the
refund is pertaining to the non-operation period, this
office has sought clarification from headquarters about
the refund of the advance license fee paid by the
licensees. Accordingly, the licensee was informed vide
this office letter dated 23.12.2021, for her
representation dated 18.12.2021.
11. It is submitted that, this office has processed
the refund of the security deposit and license fee of the
licensee. The security deposit was refunded to the
licensee and refunding the license fee was under
process, as the clarification has been sought from
the head quarters. This office has taken initiative
in the process of refund of the license fee as such
it is illegal and arbitrary for the petitioner to file
the present contempt case.
4. Learned counsel representing the Deputy Solicitor
General of India also brings on record the proceedings
dated 20.11.2023 and the same is extracted hereinunder:
"As per Hon'ble High Court of Telangana's
Judgment (W.P.No.3044 of 2023) orders, an
amount of Rs.3,74,135/- has been refunded
through NEFT to your A/c.No.52076121090, at
State Bank of India/Raichur Branch, as confirmed
by Sr.DFM/GTL vide letter cited above reference
2.
May kindly ensure the receipt of the payment of
Rs.3,74,135/- (Rupees three lakhs seventy four
thousand one hundred and thirty five only) and confirm
this office for further course of action."
5. Learned counsel representing the Deputy Solicitor General
of India submits that the order of this Court dated 16.10.2023 in
W.P.No.3044 of 2023 has been complied with and the contempt
needs to be closed.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner, however, submits
that the petitioner is entitled for more amounts than what
has been released to the petitioner as refundable amount.
This Court opines that the same cannot be considered
under contempt jurisdiction.
7. Taking into consideration the averments made in the
counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents at
paragraph Nos.9 to 11 (referred to extracted above) and
also the contents of the proceedings dated 20.11.2023
(referred to extracted above), the contempt case is closed
giving liberty to the petitioner to avail the remedies as are
available under law. However, in the circumstances of the
case, there shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in the
writ petition shall also stand closed.
___________________________
MRS JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA
Date: 16-04-2024
Lpd
HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA
CONTEMPT CASE NO.276 of 2024
Date: 16.04.2024
Lpd
