HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH. BILASPUR CONTEMPT CASE (0 No.21S/2009 PETITiONER RESPONDENTS Radheshyam Shukia, S/o Shri Vlshnudatt ShukSa, aged about 53 years, Retired Headmaster, R/o Ptot No.6, P & T Coiony, Rohanjpuram, District Raipur (C.G.) Versys 1 Shri Aaditya Chandak, Biock Deve!opment Education Offlcer, (B.E.O.), Dharseeva, District Raipur (C.G.) 2 Shri T.K. Sori, Divissonai Joint Dlrector, Treasuries Account and Pension, District Raipur (C.G.) CQNTEMPTPETiTIONUNDERARTICLE21SOF_THE CO^STITUT'ON OF !^ID!A Aiopearance: r. Sameer Behar, CounseS forthe'petitioner. SVSr. Devershi Thakur, Counsei for respondent Mo.1. Mr. Pankaj Shrivastava, Counsel for respondent No.2. Respondent No.1 - Mr. Aaditya Chandak Is a!so present in person. ORAL ORDER (15.07.2010) SUNILKUIVIARSINHA.J. Heard. The petitioner is a retired Head Master. He has fiied this petition for.initiation of proceedings of contempt against the respondents for alleged disobedience of the order dated 15.01.2009 passed by this Court in W.P. (S)No.5695/2008. This Court while disposing the aforesajd Writ Petition passed the tbtlowing order on 15.01.2009: "Having heard learned counsei for the parties, having regard to the fact that the above recovery has been made from the salary ot the petitsoner after his retlrement that too wlthout affording any opportunity of hearing to the CONTEJV8PT CASE (Cl No.215/2009 v petitloner and reiying upon the judgment in the matter of Vldyadhar Tmari (Supra), \ am of the opinion that the order of recovery cannot be sustained and accordingly the same Ss set aside. It is directed that the respondents/State shail refund recovered sum of Rs.38,355/- Vi/ith interest @ 6% per annum from the date of recovery. Jt Is further dlrected that the pension case ot the petitioner shail be re-processed and accordingSy, the penslon shal! be flxed." Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that since the orderwas not compiied by the concerned authorities, the petitioner had to file this contempt petition. Reply on behalf of respondent No.2 has been tiied. It appears from the documents filed along with the reply and it is also admltted by iearned counsei tbr the petitioner that the principai amount of Rs.38,355^- aiong with interest @. 6% per annum, in totai Rs.40,656/-, has aiready been paid to the petitioner vide Cheque No.358353 dated 03.08.2009 Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in thls manner, the first part of the order has been complied. However, the respondents have not complied the second part of the order, which relates to re-processing of the pension case of the petitioner. Mr. Aaditya Chandak, Biock Education Officer (respondent No.1), present in this Court, on the basis of the documents available before him, submits that the pension case of the petitioner has been re-processed from his office through memo dated 23.09.2009 and the same may be pending in the office of the Joint Director, Treasury, Accounts and Pension, Raipur. He turnishes a copy of the memo dated 23.09.2009 along with other documents. in view of the above, it appears that there is sufficient compliance of the order passed by this Court on 15.01.2009. Tii! 11.09.2009, time was consumed in maKing l;l^:i!;-i' :|jj;!.;:i|l:^j!^,;;:'^ iiji:il:':::^'':l;J!:i^.'l-^ 11:; ^ii. i-"liil ilill: Jlli s^na w^ fQisiiii11^:;i^ij(^No^i^i2i(M»r :paym;ei^^oNh^|aid|aiTio|nti:^J|i6|Retitio^ ^n^l|iefTrU3n|i'<1j||e|i|i|e|||$^ ::,1Xirther;from^&^<^^|is|>|r^nf^o.Xsf^r^ jnAh^ abov6^c:^^nd|ciK^mitai^^ ,,dQ^n6t-:deem^a|3|FG^^:|ojRrice|d;I^ ••l,^hei^lpr|3(ieectSF^^1iof|^cc^ ^|o^errts||ie|||3l^|arje|^^ l:AI-^eye^l^ |th^y:^[fe^a|lQn^ ^withj^^Feasonail^l|eri<ii,|hei|^rej^i^lv^ .•;tp^|le^l^an^|^|||itjQri^||o||Sc^ ;.^pot^jble^^|i's||tie.|^%;^ :':^t^.|^io(i|||ir^;^l^cysRoseGlsof^ Sd/- Sunil Kumar Sinha Judge