Madhya Pradesh High Court
Ravendra Mishra vs Shri Neeraj Mandlo on 19 March, 2024
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
CONC No. 1903 of 2020
(RAVENDRA MISHRA Vs SHRI NEERAJ MANDLO AND OTHERS)
Dated : 19-03-2024
Shri Ratnakar Prasad Mishra - Advocate for the petitioner.
Shri Sanjeev Kumar Singh - Advocate for the respondents.
The present contempt petition has been preferred by the petitioner for non-compliance of the order dated 22.11.2019 passed by the High Court in W.P. No.6481/2019 titled Ravendra Mishra vs. State of M.P. and Others.
The order is reproduced herein under :-
"Shri R.P. Mishra, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Gulab Kali Patel, G.A. for the respondent-State. This petition has been filed by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking following relief:-
"(1) Direct the respondents to classify the petitioner as permanent employee on the post of Chowkidar in compliance of the order passed by the Labour Court Rewa and to pay the amount of Rs. 6,44,057/-
a l on g w i th appropriate interest on it and other consequential benefit accrued to the petitioner in the interest of justice.
(2) any other suitable relief or direction or order deems fit in the facts and circumstances of the case may kindly be granted in favour of petitioner in the interest of justice."
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in petitioner's favour, the Labour Court has passed the order on 19.03.2001, which was assailed by the respondent before the Industrial Court by filing an appeal. The aforesaid appeal was also dismissed on 28.06.2011. Thereafter, the petitioner filed W.P. No. 10519/2004 before this Court which has also been dismissed vide order dated 05.05.2009 and Signature Not Verified Signed by: PRIYANKA PITHAWE Signing time: 3/20/2024 5:13:24 PM 2 subsequently in the execution proceedings, the Labour Court has issued the RRC to the Collector (Recovery), District Rewa in favour of the petitioner on 05.05.2017 but till date the aforesaid RRC has not been executed. Reply has been filed by the respondents/State in which it is averred that respondents have preferred a review petition against the order passed by the Labour Court which is still pending before the labour court and without waiting for its decision, the present petition has been filed. It is further stated in the reply that next date of hearing is 07.03.2019 but till the counsel for the State is not aware of the subsequent proceedings. In the considered opinion of this court, such a plea as has been raised by the State cannot be countenance and infact amounts to circumventing the order passed by this court on 05.05.2009 in W.P. No. 10519/2004.
S o far as the review application pending before the Labour Court is concerned, parties would be subject to the order passed therein and can exercise their rights in accordance with law.
In view of the same, the petition stands allowed and the respondent no.2 is directed to execute the RRC expeditiously to recover the aforesaid amount preferably within a period of three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order and intimation in this regard be made to the Registry of this Court regarding the compliance of this order.
Accordingly, this petition stands disposed of." The aforesaid order was corrected vide order dated 17.07.2020 passed in Review Petition No.609/2020 to the extent that at the second page of the aforesaid order, the word 'respondent no.2' shall be read as 'respondent no.4'. In this way, the respondent No.4, i.e., Shri Dr. Ilayaraja T, District Collector, Rewa was held to be the competent authority, who shall execute the RRC expeditiously and recover the amount in question within a specified period as directed by the Court vide order dated 22.11.2019. The aforesaid order has not Signature Not Verified Signed by: PRIYANKA PITHAWE Signing time: 3/20/2024 5:13:24 PM 3 been complied with and that has led to filing of the present contempt petition.
In the order dated 09.11.2022 passed by this Court, following observations were made :-
" Shri R.P. Mishra, counsel for the petitioner. Shri Manan Agrawal, counsel for the respondents. T hi s contempt petition is arising out of order dated 22/11/2019 passed in W.P. No. 6481/2019 by which this Court directed the respondents to execute the RRC expeditiously to recover the amount preferably within a period of three months.
T he counsel contends that RRC was of Rs. 644057/- whereas the respondents have filed a compliance report alongwith Annexures R-1, R-2 and perusal of page 6 thereof reveals that as against RRC of Rs. 644057/- only a n amount of Rs. 196518/- has been sanctioned thus, submits that alleged compliance is merely an eyewash and there is complete failure on the part of respondents while complying the order passed by this Court in W.P. No. 6481/2019.
Counsel for the respondents submits that the calculation submitted by the petitioner includes the amount of annual increment whereas the Apex Court in the case of Ram Naresh Rawat Vs. State of M.P. has made it clear that in case of classification as permanent employee, employee is only entitled to get the pay scale of the post but not the annual increment therefore, the calculation has been made by the department which comes to a total of Rs. 196518/- and the same has been sanctioned and paid to the petitioner. Having heard the rival submissions of the parties. This Court directed the respondents to execute the RRC. It is contended by the counsel for the petitioner that amount mentioned in the RRC is of Rs. 644057/- and once the said order has been issued by this Court, the respondents ought to have sought clarification from this Court but instead has only sanctioned the amount of Rs. 196518/-. The respondents have nowhere stated that any effort was made by them to seek review of order Signature Not Verified Signed by: PRIYANKA PITHAWE Signing time: 3/20/2024 5:13:24 PM 4 dated 22/11/2019 passed in W.P. No. 6481/2018. Therefore, in the considered view of this Court, this conduct of the respondents is required to be explained by the officer incharge of the case.
Accordingly, Officer Incharge of the case is directed to remain personally present before this Court on 22/11/2022.
List on 22/11/2022."
Evidently, the RRC was in a sum of Rs.6,44,057/-, whereas, the respondents have filed compliance report along with Annexures-R/1 and R/2 only for a sum of Rs.1,96,518/-. The compliance report was filed along with an affidavit on 08.11.2021. The order dated 05.10.2021 passed by the Executive Engineer, Public Works Department, Division No.1, Rewa, is suggestive of the fact that the amount of Rs.1,96,518/- has been calculated on the basis of Dearness Allowance from 01.09.2009 to 31.12.2014 and the difference in the amount to the tune of Rs.1,96,518/- has been sanctioned in favour of the petitioner. Vide the aforesaid order dated 09.11.2022, the Court, after considering the stand of the respondents, directed the respondents to execute the RRC for an amount of Rs.6,44,057/-. On the basis of the stand of the respondents, the respondents could have asked for a clarification of the order dated 22.11.2019.
During the course of arguments, learned counsel for the respondents has conceded that the review petition filed against the order dated 22.11.2019 has been dismissed. Vide the aforesaid order dated 09.11.2022, the Court also observed that the conduct of the respondents is required to be explained by the Officer-In-charge of the case. The Officer-In-Charge was accordingly directed to remain personally present before the Court on 22.11.2022. On 22.11.2022, the factum of pendency of review petition was brought to the notice of the Signature Not Verified Signed by: PRIYANKA PITHAWE Signing time: 3/20/2024 5:13:24 PM 5 Court and thereafter, the case was again taken up on number of dates. Admittedly, the review application has already been dismissed, but the order dated 22.11.2019 has not been complied with so far. Even in the compliance report, the respondents have again taken the stand that only an amount of Rs.1,96,518/- is payable to the petitioner. A perusal of numerous orders on record is indicative of the fact that the respondent No.4 is not interested in complying with the order and is unnecessarily sticking to the stand of the respondents that only an amount of Rs.1,96,518/- is payable, for which sanction has been granted by the Government vide letter dated 08.09.2021 and in this regard, the order dated 05.10.2021 has also been passed by the Executive Engineer, Public Works Department, Division No.1, Rewa. Even during the course of argument, learned counsel for the respondents reiterated the stand of the respondents for the amount of Rs.1,96,518/- only.
From the aforesaid stand of the respondents, the respondent No.4, being the competent authority, is found to have committed contempt of the order of the Court dated 22.11.2019, by showing intentional disrespect to the order by taking a ground which was available to the respondents in the main writ petition. Having failed to invite any favourable observations from the Writ Court, on the basis of the stand of the respondents and also having failed in the review petition, the respondents cannot turn around to claim that their calculations are legal in order to curtail RRC from Rs.6,44,057/- to Rs.1,96,518/-. Even this Court, vide order dated 09.11.2022, has specifically observed that the RRC has to be executed in a sum of Rs.6,44,057/- and once the said order has been passed by the Court, the respondents ought to have sought clarification from the Writ Court, but instead, they have sanctioned an amount of Rs.1,96,518/-. Now, admittedly, the review application against the order dated 22.11.2019 has Signature Not Verified Signed by: PRIYANKA PITHAWE Signing time: 3/20/2024 5:13:24 PM 6 been dismissed, therefore, there is no occasion for the competent authority/ respondent No.4 to blow hot and cold in the same breathe. The stand of the respondents on record is found to be an act of intentional disrespect to the order dated 22.11.2019 passed by the Writ Court in W.P. No.6481/2018.
For the reasons recorded herein above, I find that the respondent No.4 has committed contempt of the order dated 22.11.2019 passed by this Court in W.P. No.6481/2018.
Let the respondent No.4 be present personally in the Court for receiving punishment.
List this case on 03.04.2024.
(RAJ MOHAN SINGH) JUDGE Priya.P Signature Not Verified Signed by: PRIYANKA PITHAWE Signing time: 3/20/2024 5:13:24 PM