IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA MJC No.994 of 2006 VIRENDRA SINGH & ORS Versus STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 11/ 02.07.2008 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned counsel for the State and learned counsel for the Union of India. By order dated 15.12.1998 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 657 of 1998, this Court directed the respondent-authorities (opposite parties herein) to pay all the admitted dues, legally payable to the petitioner, within six weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of the order along with interest at the rate of 10% per annum on the balance amount from the date of retirement till the date of respective payments along with cost, which is assessed at Rs.1000/-. The petitioner has filed this M.J.C. petition for punishing the concerned opposite parties for disobedience of the specific order of this Court. A show cause dated 22.05.2008 has been filed on behalf of the opposite parties stating that the entire order of this Court mentioned above has been complied and all the admitted dues legally payable to the petitioner with interest at the rate of 10% per annum and a cost of Rs.1000/- have already been paid to the petitioner. He also tenders unqualified apology for delay in making the said payments. However, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that although the said amount has been paid but it should have been paid on the basis of revised pay. On the other hand, learned counsel for the opposite parties submits that the petitioner was found guilty of defalcation in National - 2 - Saving Certificate and in the year 1973 a proceeding was drawn against him and in the year 1973 he was suspended. He further submits that during the pendency of the proceeding and the criminal case the father of the petitioner died. He further submits that from the above-mentioned order in question there is nothing to show that the amounts have to be paid as per the revised pay, whereas, the authorities concerned have calculated the admitted dues legally payable to the petitioner and have paid it to the petitioner. In the said circumstances, there appears to be no violation of this court’s order and, accordingly, this M.J.C. is disposed of. MPS/ ( S. N. Hussain, J. )