CLCON/196/2021
2021 Latest Caselaw 3418 UK

IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
           AT NAINITAL
     ON THE 2ND DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2021
                        BEFORE:
 HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR TIWARI
     CONTEMPT PETITION No. 196 of 2021
BETWEEN:

Raghuveer Singh Mingwal                   ...Petitioner
     (By Mr. B.M. Pingal, Advocate)

AND:

Vandana & another                         ... Opposite Parties

     (By Mr. Pradeep Hairiya, Advocate)


                      JUDGMENT

1. Writ Court, vide order dated 08.12.2020, disposed of WPSS No. 1640 of 2020 in terms of the judgment dated 04.09.2017 passed in SPA No. 202 of 2017. Operative portion of the said judgment passed in SPA No. 202 of 2017 is reproduced below:-

"33. It may be true that communication dated 24.02.2011 detailed about grant of benefit of gratuity at the time of superannuation. It provides for the method of calculating the gratuity but question is who should pay it. It is addressed to Member Secretary of the District Administrative Committee. Having regard to the fact that it relates to the earlier years, we think that interest of justice would be sub served, if we direct the appellant no. 2 to consider the case of the writ petitioners, having regard to the conspectus of the Act, Rules and also observations which we have made. A decision will be taken within three months from the date of production of certified copy of this judgment. He must ensure that petitioners are paid amount that is legally due to them.

34. Judgment of the learned Single Judge will stand modified to the above extent and all the appeals stand allowed, as above."

2. Since the retiral dues of the petitioner were not released, therefore, petitioner filed this Contempt petition alleging wilful disobedience of the order passed by Writ Court.

3. A compliance affidavit has been filed by Ms. Vandana Singh, Registrar Cooperative Societies, Government of Uttarakhand, Dehradun.

4. Mr. Pradeep Hairiya, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the opposite parties submits that sanction has been granted for releasing all the retiral dues to the petitioner, except leave encashment. Regarding leave encashment, he submits that cooperative societies are reeling under severe financial crisis; therefore, it is not possible for releasing the amount of leave encashment in favour of the petitioner. However, he assures the Court that amount of leave encashment would also be released to the petitioner within nine months.

5. Since necessary sanction for releasing of all other retiral dues have already been granted by the Competent Authority, therefore, this Court hopes and trusts that such retiral dues would be released in favour of the petitioner, within six months from today. As regards amount of leave encashment, since necessary sanction has not been granted so far, therefore, the amount of leave encashment shall be released to the petitioner, within nine months from today.

6. With the aforesaid direction, the contempt petition is closed. Notices issued to the opposite parties are hereby discharged.

7. However, in case of any default on the part of the opposite parties in releasing the retiral dues of the petitioner within stipulated time, petitioner shall be at liberty to seek recall of this order.

(MANOJ KUMAR TIWARI, J.) Aswal