CLCON/314/2014
2021 Latest Caselaw 736 UK

IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
           AT NAINITAL
        ON THE 8TH DAY OF MARCH, 2021
                         BEFORE:
 HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR TIWARI
       Contempt Petition No. 314 of 2014
BETWEEN:
Jagdish Prasad Agrawal                       ...Petitioner
     (None present for the petitioner)

AND:
Smt. Jayanti Hyanki & others             ... Respondents
     (By Mr. Pradeep Hariya, Standing Counsel for the
     State   and Mr. Gopal K. Verma, Standing Counel for
     respondent no. 3)

                      JUDGMENT

1. Feeling aggrieved by non-payment of retiral dues, petitioner filed WPSS No. 1777 of 2012. The said writ petition was disposed of vide order dated 30.08.2013. The operative portion of the said order is reproduced below:-

"5. With the consent of the parties, the matter is disposed of with a direction that petitioner will approach respondent Nos. 4 and 5 with an application to remove the objections, if any, and submit the necessary papers to respondent No. 2, who is at Lucknow, so that needful be done by respondent Nos. 4 and 5 within twelve weeks from the date of such application is moved before them by the petitioner. Thereafter, respondent No. 2, as soon as receive the documents, shall dispose of the matter of pension of the petitioner within twelve weeks. In case, respondent No. 2 declines to give pension to the petitioner, he shall do so by way of passing the speaking order. No order as to costs."

2. This contempt petition was filed alleging wilful disobedience of the said order. Contempt notices were issued to all the respondents in the contempt petition.

3. Ms. Jyanti Hyanki, Additional Director, Treasury and Pension, Kumaon Division Haldwani, District Nainital filed a short counter affidavit dated 26.11.2014 and in para 6 of the said affidavit it was stated that petitioner's pension was sanctioned as per rules and pension payment order was sent to the Treasury Hathrash (Uttar Pradesh), as desired by the petitioner.

4. Mr. Gopal K. Verma, learned Standing Counsel for respondent no. 3 submits that the Director, Training & Employment, Lucknow has passed an order on 15.10.2020 rejecting the representation of the petitioner. The said order is on record as annexure No. CA-3 to the counter affidavit filed by Mr. Anil Kumar (respondent no. 3).

5. From the perusal of the said order, it reveals that petitioner's claim for promotion pay scale has been rejected on the ground that his work and conduct was not satisfactory.

6. Having regard to the averments made in the affidavits filed by the respondents, this Court is of the considered opinion that it is not a case of wilful disobedience of the writ court.

7. In such view of the matter, the contempt petition is closed. Notices issued to the respondents are hereby discharged. However, petitioner shall be at liberty to approach appropriate forum in case any of his grievance still survives.

(MANOJ KUMAR TIWARI, J.) Aswal