IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL. Contempt Petition No. 170 of 2007 District Udham Singh Nagar Seasonal Collection Amin Evam Seasonal Collection Peon Sangh ……. Petitioner. Versus Nrip Singh Napachiyal & Others. …..Respondents. Sri P.S. Adhikari, Senior Advocate assisted by Sri B.S. Adhikari, learned counsel for the petitioner. Sri Kailash Tiwari, learned brief holder for the State/respondent. Dated: 22.06.2009 Hon’ble B.C. Kandpal, J. By way of this Contempt Petition the petitioner has prayed for issuing notice to the Respondents and punishing them for willful and deliberate disobedience of the judgment and order dated 13-02-2007 passed by this Court in Writ Petition No. 1667 (S/S) of 2003. The relevant portion of the impugned order dated 13-02-2007 reads as follows:- Learned counsel for the petitioner has prayed that writ petition may be disposed of with a direction to the respondents to grant service benefits such as house allowance, annual increment, group insurance facility, provident fund as have been provided to Collection Amins in District –Pithoragarh. The prayer is innocuous. Accordingly, respondents are directed to provide service benefits for which petitioner is entitled in accordance with law.” The counter affidavit has been filed by respondent no. 1 standing therein that against the judgment passed by the learned Single Judge dated 13-02-2007, the State Government went in Special Appeal before the Division Bench of this Court and the Division Bench of this Court has passed the following order:- “We have perused the impugned judgment dated 13-02-2007 passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No. 1667 of 2003 (S/S). Mainly two reliefs were claimed by the Writ Petitioner in the wit petition. The first relief relating to regularization was given up. In so far as the second relief for provision of some service benefits such as, house rent allowance, annual increments, group insurance facility and provident fund was concerned, the learned Single Judge disposed of the writ petition by directing the appellants to provide the service benefits, “for which petitioner is entitled in accordance with law.” The learned Single Judge did not adjudicate upon any issue relating to the provision for grant of the aforesaid service benefits nor issued any mandamus directing or commanding the appellants to actually provide any service benefit. It only issued a direction that the benefits be granted or provided if the appellants found the writ petitioner entitled for the same in accordance with law. It was entirely for the appellants to examine the matter and, upon such examination, if the appellants found that the writ petitioner in fact was entitled to the grant of the aforesaid service benefits under law, either all of them or anyone of them, only in that eventuality, the benefits were to be granted. According to us, the aforesaid direction is totally innocuous and cannot be interfered with because if indeed the law entitled the writ petitioner for the grant of the service benefits, these benefits cannot be denied to it. If, however, the law did not entitle it for the grant of the service benefits, the writ petitioner cannot be granted such benefits. In any event, the determination has to be done by the appellants and, of course, on merits of the case and in accordance with law.” Learned Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that although the Division Bench of this Court has clarified the situation and has made observation that “in any event, the determination has to be done by the appellant (State Government) and, of course, on merits of the case and in accordance with law”, but the difficulty with the petitioners is that they are not getting any benefit as the State Government has adopted the attitude of disparity. He has stated that the Collection Amins of District Pithoragarh are getting all the benefits in view of the order passed by this Court and the order passed by this Court pertaining to the Collection Amins of District Udham Singh Nagar has not been challenged by the State Government as yet, while the Collection Amins of District Udham Singh Nagar are not getting any benefit for the reason that the Division Bench of this Court has given the power of determination to the State Government on merits and in accordance with law. He has stated that the State Government has not determined the matter pertaining to the Collection Amins of District Udham Singh Nagar on merits and in accordance with law as yet. Therefore, the Collection Amins of District Udham Singh Nagar are not getting any benefit as yet. The grievance of the petitioner cannot be looked into in the Contempt Petition at this stage and this Court has limited jurisdiction in the Contempt Petition and no direction with regard to the determination of the matter on merits can be passed by this Court. However, in any case if the petitioners feel so, they may file a fresh Writ Petition before this Court seeking relief therein. With the said observations, I do not find any justification to continue the Contempt proceeding against the respondents. The Contempt petition is accordingly dismissed. The notice issued against respondent no. 2 is hereby discharged. (B.C. Kandpal, J.) SP