The Hon'ble Sri Justice C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy Contempt Case No.1467 of 2009 Dated: 18-12-2009 Between: K.Maruti Mohan, S/o.Subramaniam, Aged 59 years, Oc: Retd.Seretay, The Kauthalam L.S.C.S. Kauthalam Mandal, Adoni, Kurnool District. …Petitioner and M.Veera Sena Reddy, President, The Kauthalam L.S.C.S., Kauthalam Mandal, Adoni, Kurnool District. …Respondents The Court made the following: O r d e r : In this Contempt case, the petitioner complained of willful disobedience of Order, dated 1st May, 2009, in W.P.No.9627 of 2009. In the said order, this Court directed the respondent to dispose of the petitioner’s representation, dated 12-01-2009, for payment of retirement benefits to the petitioner. In the counter-affidavit filed by the respondent, it is stated that the petitioner was already paid the gratuity amount of Rs.1,00,000/- after the disposal of the Writ Petition. With regard to return of deposit amount of Rs.10,000/-, it is stated that in pursuance of an order passed in E.P.No.77 of 1999, before the District Co-operative Officer, Adoni, the said amount was deposited and that if the petitioner submits the receipt given to him at the time of deposit, the amount will be returned. In so far as the claim for payment of provident fund is concerned, it is stated that the petitioner, who was eligible for 180 days leave encashment, has encashed leave for 240 days resulting in over-drawal of Rs.22,200/-; that the closing balance and opening balance of accounts are not tallying and that there is a cash balance of Rs.19,237-22ps lying with the petitioner. It is further stated that as per the accounts of the Society, the petitioner is liable to account for Rs.1,31,048-80 ps and that the Provident Fund amount could not be paid to the petitioner due to non-availability of the Provident Fund account in the Society. The respondent has undertaken to get a further verification of record and pay the balance amount, if any, due to the petitioner after such verification of the record and accounts. Having regard to the above-mentioned stand taken by the respondent, I do not find any reason to proceed against the respondent in Contempt. The petitioner is permitted to approach the respondent for reconciliation of the accounts. On such reconciliation, if any amount is found payable to the petitioner, the respondent shall pay the same without any further loss of time. Subject to the above observations, the Contempt Case is disposed of. _______________________​____ (C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J) 18th December, 2009 lur