IN THE HIGiLCOUKTOF'JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR rC.G.1 c^ c-^ C0NTEMPT CASE N0. ^2- /2009 PETITIONER ....-•""" W--"'. <..yn •A?7 "..-^ ^•v^^ew' ^^^- fvS!,:^-' RESPONDENT Jfe&anan F'rasad Gupta S/o Late Sukharu Gupta, Aged-about 67 years, R/o vUlage 8s post - Tetia, block- Puspur, Distt.- Raigarh [C.G.] VERSUS - /? 1. Sri A.K.Jha, Jdint Director, Accourits \Treasury and Pension, Bilaspur [C.G.] _Joshi«^-. _; , ,. 2.Sri G.P.gia^' District Education officer, Raigarh, DiStt- Raigarh [C.G.] 3.8ri Ishwar Prasad Patel, Principal, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Jatari, Block-Pusour, Distt.- Rajgarh [C.G.] "120F' ^ C»NTEMPTPETmON UNDERSECnO'!fl2^0FTHE CONTEMPT OF COURTSACT REA^WITItARTtGLE 2A5 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA r-, HIGH COURT Cff CHHATTISGARH : BILASPUR Sinale Bench: Hon'ble Shri Manindra Mohan Shrivastava. J. Contempt Case (C\ N0.187/2009 Petitioner Respondents Laxman PrasadGupta Versus Shri A. K. Jha and Others (ContemptPetition underSection12oftheContemptofCourtsActread with Article 215 of the Constitutionof India) X Present: - ShriD. R. Patel, counsel for the petitfoner. Shri J. P. Shukla, counsel for respondent No.1. Shri S. L Chandra, counsel forthe respondents No.2 & 3. ORAL ORDER (f^ssedon 05-01-2011) Heard. 2. Learned counsel for the petitfoner submittect that though the petition filed by the petitioner was allowed by this Court vkle order dated 11-08-2008 in W.P.(S.) No.4373 of 2008, the respondents initially did not pay the amount which was illegally recovered, but tater on, during the pendency ofthe petitfon, the sakl amount of Rs.54,51(y- was paid through demand dfaft and deposited the same in the petitioner's account on 10-07-2009. Leamed counsel submits that even though the amount has been paid as directed by this Court, the interest part t0ble to be pakj @ 6% has not been paid till date, thus, the respondents have committed gcoss contempt oftheorderpassed bythis Court. 3. Leamed counsel appearing on behalf of respondents No.2 & 3 submits thatthere was no williul disobedience of the Court order onthe part ofthe respondents. It is submitted that aftertheorders passed bythis cCourt, warioys departmental correspondences took ptece and therefore, ^-•^' N'.. ,.A;"Ei%> ^^-wi;"^. • ,| ^^^£^4"^^ ^ ^y 2- some time has been consumed and though, thereafter, an amouint of Rs.54,51(y- has been pakl to the petitioner and the respondent authorities are taking expeditious steps for payment of interest of Rs.7,386/- ateo as directed by this Court vide memo dated 18-11-2010 (Document-A) and the talance amount is also in the process of payment and the same shall be pafcl at the earliest. Learned counsel for the respondents No.2 & 3 assures this Court that the balance amount of interest shall also be paid as soon as possible. Learned counsel for the respondents No.2 & 3 therefore submits that they have not committed any contempt. 4. Considering the submission made by learned counsel for the partiesand that the resppndents have paid the recovered amount of Rs.54,510/- through demand draft and deposited in the petitioner's account on 10-07-2009 and that a part of the interest amount has also been directed to be paid vfcle memo dated 18-11-2010, in the opinionof this Court, though there appears to besome delay in complying the order passed by this Court, it is difficult to accept that the respondents have committed contempt by willful disobeying the order passed by this Court. Therefore, under these circumstances, rule issued to the respondents is discharged. However, the respondent authorities are directed to take exp^ditious steps for payment of the balance amount of the interest part within an outer timit ofthree months from today. 5. With the aforesaid direction, the petitjor^stan^disposed of. 1 Sd/- Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Judge fv s1.. \-