Central Administrative Tribunal - Allahabad
Smt. Pushpa Singh W/O Sri Pramod Kumar ... vs Madan Kishor Verma on 20 April, 2011
(OPEN COURT) CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL ALLAHABAD BENCH ALLAHABAD ALLAHABAD this the 20th day of April 2011 HONBLE MR. D.C. LAKHA, MEMBER- A HONBLE MR. A.K. BHARDWAJ, MEMBER - J CIVIL CONTEMPT APPLICATION NO. 183 OF 2010 IN ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO. 485 of 2004 Smt. Pushpa Singh W/o Sri Pramod Kumar Singh, Resident of Village Nizampur, District Badaun. Applicant. VE R S U S Madan Kishor Verma, Superintendent of Post Offices, Badaun Division, Badaun. ..Respondent Advocate for the applicant: Shri M.K. Upadhyaya Advocate for the Respondents : Sri R.K. Srivastava O R D E R
Heard Shri M.K. Upadhyaya, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri R.K. Srivastava, learned counsel for the respondents.
2. Learned counsel for the respondents has put up the affidavit of compliance dated 20.4.2011 in pursuance of order dated 9.3.2011. This Contempt Petition has emanated from the order of the Tribunal dated 3.6.2004 in which, on non-compliance, Civil Contempt Application No. 02/2005 was filed. Operative part of both the orders are relevant. In the order dated 3.6.2004, while allowing the O.A., the following orders was passed:-
.Accordingly, the O.A. succeeds and is allowed. The impugned order is quashed. The applicant is entitled to all consequential benefits. The Superintendent of Post Offices is directed to implement the order within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
Later in the Contempt application, vide order dated 7.1.2010, the following order was passed:-
9. In view of it, respondent/opposite party is directed to pay back wages along with 7.5% simple interest from the date amount became due till the date it is paid within two months on receipt of the order otherwise shall face consequence of committing contempt deliberately. This Contempt Petition is disposed of finally.
3 In para 2 of the affidavit of compliance filed on 20.4.2011, it has been stated that the order has been complied with after calculating the entire amount to the tune of 50% as directed by this Tribunal. In the subsequent para of this affidavit, it is stated that Rs.1,99,121/- has been paid. The cheque to this effect is paid in the Court today to the applicants counsel.
4. It is clear from both the orders of the Tribunal, as referred to above, that there is no mention of 50% to be paid to the applicant. In the order dated 3.6.2004 as it is clear from the above that the order was to pay all consequential benefits and in the later, order passed in contempt petition No.07/10 dated 7.1.2010, the direction was to pay back wages alongwith 7.5% simple interest.
5. From the affidavit of compliance, it is not clear as to what basis 50% amount has been calculated whereas it has not been directed by the Court in the order. In the amount shown in the cheque, it is also not clear as to which amount is calculated against the principal or the main dues and which amount, whether included or not, against the simple interest.
6. Respondents counsel has stated that in case of termination when official is taken back in service as per order of Court, Rules are that they are to be paid 50% against the actual dues for that period for which he has been out of service. He is not in a position to produce the Rule about this provision. It seems that there is some perception of the Court order by the Respondents.
7. In the light of above, we deem it just and proper to give one more opportunity to put up the compliance report against alongwith Rules, if any, as stated by the respondents counsel. Two weeks time is allowed for the same.
8. Let it be made clear that if the compliance false short of satisfaction of the Court on the next date, alleged contemnor shall be present in the Court.
List on 10.5.2011.
Copy of the order be given to the parties counsel.
Member (J) Member (A)
Manish/-
??
??
??
??
4