IN THE HON'BLE HIGHCOURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CONTEMPTJ^ASEiC)J?o^/ff'"^2o¥ff K ^®""?' (Arising out of Order passed by the Hontile Division Bench of High Court of Chhattisgarh dated 15-09-2009,in the matter of Sate of C.G. & another V/s U.D.Patni, in Writ Appeal No 157/2009 and earlier Order passed by the Hon'ble Signal Judge of High Court of Chhattisgarh dated 28th July 2006 In the matter of U.D.Patni V/s State of M.P.(Now C.G.) SB another in W.P.No 1353/2005) . PETITIONER >,t^^. , U.D.Patni S/o Late PremVallabh .\.r:'C^J ^^,^'^2V Patni Retired Assistance ^'w ^^s' "•if ^•-'4''>.''i. .^•s'"1 ..-..<I.\ 'y* ^ \^6"v ,\<1 ...'^ Comn-iissioner (Organiser) Aged about 70 year R/o HIG-19 Aiya Colony Tifra, Bilaspur,C.G. VERSUS CONTEMNORS: 1. R.P.Mandal Secretary, ST/SC Development Deparbnent, Mantralaya, D.K.S.Bhavan Raipur C.G. 2. Dr.D.S.Ananat Commissioner/Director ST/SC Development, Department, Ravi Shanker Viswavidyalaya Pariser Raipur C.G. CONTEMPT P^TITION UNDERARTICLE2 IS^QF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA L^J> HIGH COURTOF CHHATTISGARH : BILASPUR Single Bench: Hon'ble Shri Manindra Mohan SJirivastava, J, Petitioner Contemnors Contempt Case (Civill N0.115/2010 U. D. Patni Versus R. P. Mandal and another Contempt Petition under Artjcle 21^of the Constitution of India Present: - Shri A. K. Yadav,counsel for the petitioner. Shri Arun Sao, counsel for the respondents. ORAL ORDER (Passed on 25'" August, 2011) Heard. 2. On 28-07-2006, Writ Petition (S) No. 1353 sf 2005 filed by the petitioner was allowed. The respondent authorities in the writ petition wer6directed to treat the petitioner as retired atthe age of60 years and it was declared that the petitioner is entitled to all consequential benefits of two years, including revision of pension, gratuity etc. Further direction was that for granting the said relief, the process be completed within a period of three months from the date of receipi/production of a copy of this order. Later on, Review Petition was filed by the petitioner to substitute State of Chhattisgarh in place of State of Madhya Pradesh as respondent No.1. The Review petition was disposed off vide order dated 11-09-2006 modifying the order to the extent that wherever State of Madhya Pradesh has been typed, it be read as State of Chhattisgarh through Secretary, Tribal Welfare Department, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur. WritAppeal was also preferred against the order dated 28-07-2006 passed in W.P.(S)No.1353 of 2005, which was dismissed vide order dated 15-09-2009. The petitioner has made certain representations, but the benefits were not extended. Hence the petitioner filed the instantcontempt petition. •jsuoiijtsd sqi ys senp snoueA y> tUSLuAed mi pue JSUBLU 9L|i Buitipsdxs joj 'iedoqg '}usiudo|8Asa |equi 'JSUOISSILULUOO sqt 0} Jsua| e USUUM OS|B seq jndse|jg 'iusLudoiSASQ |Bqui 'JSUOISSIIULUOO lUBtsissy 841 '(9-U sjnxsuuy) I.IOZ-SO-ZO UQ •jsuoitiisd sqt p senp snouBA y> lusLuAed jo^ OS|B pue jsneuj sqi Bu^ipedxs joj |Bdoqg 'iueLudo|SA8Q lequj. 'JSUOISSIUJLUOO sqi 01 U9}}UM SBL| LiJBBsineqilo 10 sye}Q 'jndiey 'lu8iudo|aAea |equi 'JSUOISSILULUOO sqi ' 1.1.0Z-ZO-8Z psiep ouusuu sp!/\ •g •a}ep ||!i euop ueeq iou seq siues sqi 'paujsouoo si AiiniejB pue uoisusd jo UOISIASJ se JBJ se 'jeASMoq 'pied uesq SBL| )jed AJE|ES sqi leqi psieis seq jeuoitnsd eq} joj |asunoo peujesn •fr '/.661. 'Jsqujeoaa 01 g661. 'Ajenuep LUOJ^ pousd equo psdsaj ui ^e|BS ys sjeejje p stueujAed pSAojdde OS|B pue ysepejd eAqpe|/\| p eteis eqt y> si 'uoiteziueBjo-sj 01 joud psjiiej SAeq oqM 'ssoiii ^o psdssj ui AtiiiqEii sqt 'qsepejd EAqpe|/\| jo sieig 341 i° l.002-80-90 psiep uoitonjisui sqt p MSIA 01 leqi 'iedoqg '}usiudo|SA9a [equi 'jeuoissiLuuioo sqi peujjoiui qsspejd eAqpE|/\| ^o s»eisa4l '(fr-U sjnxsuuy) Q\,OZ-Z\,-W ps»Bp oiueLU spjA 'qsspejd eAqpeiAi 10 9}BIS 341 01 1USS pue pejedsjd sq ABLU ||iq 'jeuoitiisd sqt 01 siusujAed y) 8SB9|8J JOJ }Bql JSLIlJn^ pue soiAjes sjesA OMI jo tyeueq IUBJB QI BuiAojdde Aq jsuoiiiied sq} p jnoAB^ ui jspjo ue passed LijeBsiueqqo lo Steis 341 '(e-U sjnxsuuv) oi-oz-zo-eo uo 'eooz i°/SI-'ON |B9ddv IUM "! ^inoo siq} ^o qousg UOISIAIQ 8L|i Aq pessed 6002-60-91- psiep jspjo ^o MSIA u| 'qsspejd eh\pByi ys S}ei9 sqi q(iM dn us>|ei eq Aeiu JGUBLU sqt 'ssnp snoueA puspo 0} qsapejd BA4pB]/\| 10 3WQ 941 JO si Atiiiqei] se ieqt (i.-y ejnxeuuy) O^Z-ZO-ZO "o [.•OIM luspuodssj sq} 0} jenei e SIOJM Z'ON luepuodsej '9661--Z1.-1.£ uo pajiisj peq jsuoii!i8d sqt ysu^ Buuspisuoo pue qjeBsiueqqo p a}e}s si|l jsoijio fluepuodsaj SL|I Aq souej|dujoo joj dn us^e^ SBM iJnoQ SIL|I Aq psssed jspjo sqi leq} psieis usaq seq 11 'siuspuodssj sqi 4q pe]y useq seq qoiqM 'A|dsj u| •e 7 4-/1 ,^sa'9^. -<"?5w€'%,i ^" ^. ^: 1 1 '•^'^v's'^ fi M ff ».yw".^' .^'-' '•*.<E&^,,,,-E< wZ ">, — ^>' 6. Taking into consideration that the petitioner was retired prior to re- organization and also taking into consideration the letter dated 04-12-2010 (Annexure R-4), it appears that the liability has been undertaken by the State of Madhya Pradesh and payments are required to be released by the concerned authorities. The order has already been passed on 03-07-2010 (Annexure R-2) by the State of Chhattisgarh, Department of Tribal Development regarding payment of salary. In that view of the matter, 1 am not inclined to proceed further in the matter as against the present respondents. Rule is therefore discharged. However, in view of what has been stated by the Commissioner, Tribal Development, Bhopal in his letterdated 04-12-2010 (Annexure R-4), who was a party respondent No.2 in Writ petition (S) No.1353 of 2005, the concerned authority is obliged under the law to take expeditious steps for revision of pension and arrears of gratuity of the petitioner. The petitioner shall communicate this order to the Commissioner, Tribal Development, Bhopal for due compliance. In case, dues payable to the petitioner, as directed by this Court vide its order dated 28-07-2006 in W.P.(S)No.1353 of 2005, are not finalized for payment within a period of three months, the petitioner would be at liberty to take appropriate steps as may be available to him under the law. Though rule is being discharged, it is directed that the Commissioner, Department of Tribal Development, Raipur, State of Chhattisgarh shall also pursue the matter with the State of Madhya Pradesh and Commissioner, Tribal Development, Bhopal to get the dues of the petitioner finalized, at the earliest. 7. With the aforesaid direction, the petition is finally disposed off. Sd/- Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Judge