1 acd IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 57 OF 2008 Shri Anant S. Tambde & Ors. . . .... Petitioners. Vs. Vikas Chandra Rastogi & Ors. .... Respondents Mr. Neel Helekar, for the Petitioners. Mr. A.I. Patel, AGP for Respondent No.4. ..... CORAM: S.C.DHARMADHIKARI,J. DATE : 20th APRIL, 2010. P.C. 1. The contempt alleged in this case is of the Order of Division Bench. The case is that it has not been complied with by the State and the concerned Officers including the Collector, Ratnagiri District, the Commissioner (Supply), Kokan Division and the Secretary, Department of Food and Civil Supplies, Mantralaya. 2. The Writ Petition was filed in this Court being Writ Petition No. 3690 of 2005 and the Division Bench after hearing both sides passed the following order: “We accordingly allow this Petition and direct the respondents to make payment to Petitioners in accordance with their qualifying service within a period of 6 months from today. Rule is made absolute accordingly. However, in the facts and circumstances of the case, there shall be no order as to costs.” 2 3. This Order of the Division Bench is dated 19th December 2006. Period of six months from the said Order would definitely get over by 31.7.2006. Even if one takes into account that a S.L.P. filed before the Hon’ble Supreme Court was disposed of/dismissed on 3.8.2007, yet, the fact remains that despite communication from the Petitioners’ Advocate dated 24.8.2007 no steps were taken by the Respondents to comply with the Court’s Order. 4. It is stated that the concerned Officers have fixed the pay of the Petitioners and issued necessary order on 5.2.2008 and made payment in pursuance thereof. While it is true that the Petitioners are not fully satisfied with the exercise undertaken by the Respondents and the amount received, that is not something which would enable the Court to issue any directions in its contempt jurisdiction. This is a substantive relief which Petitioners can claim by challenging the Government Orders including pay fixation. 5. However, from the record and particularly reading of the affidavits, I find that there is absolutely no explanation as to why the order of the Division Bench could not be complied with till 5.2.2008. All that is stated that the decision was taken to challenge the Judgment and Order of the Division Bench in the Hon’ble Supreme Court. That has been dismissed on 3.8.2007. From that day till ultimate decision taken, the affidavits do not set out the reasons for the delay and it is unfortunate that no 3 application for extension of time was made to this Court. The concerned Officers did not take steps to comply with the Court’s Order despite an adverse verdict from the Hon’ble Supreme Court, but, took their own sweet time in issuing Government Orders. This matter relates to the pension of senior citizen and the delay in implementing the decision of the Court in that behalf seriously prejudices them. Further, as has been repeatedly emphasised by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, the tendency of the Officers to ignore the Court Order and take them lightly and casually has been increasing. Unless stern measures are taken, Court Orders would not be respected, and implemented promptly. For all these reasons, this is a fit case where the Respondents should be directed to pay interest for the period 30.6.2007 to 5.2.2008 and the rate at which the same should be paid is quantified at 6%. Further, the Respondents should pay costs quantified at Rs.10,000/­ to the Petitioners. Order accordingly. 6. The Contempt Petition is disposed of without expressing any opinion on merits and the import of the order of this Court. The interest and the costs be paid within a period of four weeks from today. (S. C. DHARMADHIKARI, J.)