THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU CONTEMPT CASE No.1551 of 2008 ORDER: This contempt case is filed complaining willful disobedience on the part of the respondents in implementing the order dated 11.02.2008 made in C.C.No.102 of 2008, wherein this Court while closing the Contempt Case observed as under: “It is always open for the petitioner to approach the respondents and file an application seeking details of the amount granted and, on filing such application, the respondents shall furnish such details to him within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of his application.” The original Contempt Case No.102 of 2008 was filed complaining willful disobedience on the part of the respondents in implementing the orders of this Court dated 27.11.2007 in W.P.M.P.No.32684 of 2007 in WP No.25078 of 2007, whereunder the respondents therein were directed to settle and pay the retirement benefits of the petitioner, as per his eligibility, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. The said contempt case was closed on 11.02.2008 with the above observation. Now, the present contempt case is filed alleging that the respondents have disobeyed the order dated 11.02.2008. In C.C.No.102 of 2008 it was noticed that the petitioner was paid an amount of Rs.2,70,000/- towards retirement benefits and insofar as pension was concerned, it was already recommended to the Government. However, the learned counsel for the petitioner disputed the amount paid. Hence, this Court gave liberty to the petitioner to file an application to the respondents, and the respondents, in turn, were directed to furnish such details to the petitioner. Now, the respondents have furnished details of the amounts paid. On the basis of the said information, the learned counsel for the petitioner states that the respondents have not properly complied with the order dt.11.02.2008 passed in C.C.No.102 of 2008. I am of the opinion that this Contempt Case cannot be entertained, since C.C.No.102 of 2008 was already closed. The Contempt Case is misconceived and the same is accordingly dismissed. However, this order will not preclude the petitioner from working out his remedies as available under the law. C.V.RAMULU,J Date: 08.11.2010 va