IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.366 of 2010 Sushila Rani W/O Shree Om Prakash Singh R/O Vill.- Garhi- Bishunpur, P.O.- Kiul Rly, Station, P.S.& Distt.- Lakhisarai ---Petitioner Versus 1. Dr. Kumar Sharad Chandra, Hony. Secretary, Balika Vidyapeeth, Shakti Utthan Ashram, P.S.- And District- Lakhisarai ( Pin 811311 ) 2. Smt Usha Sharma, President, Balika Vidyapeeth Shakti Utthan Ashram, P.S.- And District- Lakhisarai ( Pin 811311 ) 3. Sri Paritosh Kumar, Asstt. Commissioner, Provident Fund Officer, Adampur Chowk, Bhagalpur 4. Shri Bhim Prasad,Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Bihar Circle, Road No.- 6, R Block Bhabishya Nidhi Bhawan, Patna-1 5. Sri Binoy Sah, L.I.C. Of India Through Zonal Manager Fraser Road, Patna 6. Shri Anil Kumar Sharma, Chief Administrator Cum Secretary, Balika Vidyapeeth, Lakhisarai 7. Shree Rajneesh Kumar, General Manager [Amrapali Group] Balika Vidyapeeth, Lakhisarai, P.S.+Distt.- Lakhisarai 8. The State Of Bihar Through The Secretary, Ministry Of Human Resources ( Education ) Bihar, Patna. ---Opp. Parties ---------------------------------- 5. 21.9.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. P.K. Verma, learned Additional Advocate General no.5 appearing for opposite parties no.3 and 4. Learned counsel for the State of Bihar is also present. This application is for initiating a contempt proceeding against the opposite parties for their alleged disobedience of the order dated 10th of January, 2003 passed in CWJC No.11864 of 2002, as contained in Annexure 5/1. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that after passing of the aforesaid order, an amount of Rs.1,25,729/- has - 2 - been received by way of provident fund dues from the office of opposite parties no.3 and 4 as per the letter dated 20th of October, 2003 as stated in paragraph 6 of the contempt application. The grievance of the petitioner is that still the provident fund dues for the period 1.1.1981 to December, 1989 has remained unpaid. Mr. Verma, learned counsel appearing for opposite parties no.3 and 4 submits that the liability to pay the provident fund dues by opposite parties no.3 and 4 arises only on receipt of the provident fund contributions received in the account of the petitioner. Whatever the amount is available in the provident fund account of the petitioner, the same has been paid, which is not in dispute. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that towards the insurance amount, the opposite party-Life Insurance Corporation of India has already sent the due amount for payment to the petitioner and others as per letter dated 7.10.2003, as contained in Annexure 7/1, but the same has not been paid to her. On consideration of the submissions of the parties, this Court finds that the order of this Court has been substantially complied with and as such, this contempt application need not proceed further. However, in case the amount as claimed by the petitioner which has not been paid as yet, it will be open for her to bring it to the notice of opposite parties no.1 and 2 and on verification , if any further amount is found payable, the same may also be paid. The contempt application stands disposed of. PNM (Shailesh Kumar Sinha, J.)