1 S.B. CIVIL CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 237/2007 Mangi Bai Vs. Anil Choudhary & Anr. Date of Order :: 17.3.2008 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GOVIND MATHUR Mr. G.R. Punia, for the petitioner. Mr. D.S. Rajvi, for the respondents. ... By the judgment dated 6.12.2006 while accepting the writ petition preferred by the petitioner a direction was given to the respondents to make payment of pension to the petitioner in accordance with the 15.2.2003 passed by the Principal, CDA(P) Allahbad at the rate of Rs.2920/- per month and as revised time to time. The instant petition for initiating contempt proceedings is preferred for non-compliance of the order aforesaid. In reply to the contempt petition it is stated by learned counsel for the respondents that in compliance of the directions given by this Court a sum of Rs.91,814/- has already been paid to the petitioner as a difference in payment of the pension. Learned counsel for the petitioner while accepting the payment aforesaid states that there are some lacunaes in calculation of dues determined. 2 I have considered the facts available on record and I am of the view that there is no attempt for deliberate and willful non-compliance of the order by the respondents that may warrant initiation of proceedings under the Contempt of Courts Act,1971. The contempt petition, therefore, is dismissed. The rule issued is discharged. However, it is made clear that if the petitioner feels that any error exists in computation of the dues of liberalized pension he may submit a representation to the authority competent pointing out such error. (GOVIND MATHUR), J. Jgoyal