THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V. ESWARAIAH C.R.P.No.5713 of 2009 ORDER: This Civil Revision Petition is filed aggrieved by the order, dated 08-10-2009 passed in E.A.No.39 of 2007 in E.P.No.27 of 2006 in O.S.No.3155 of 2003 by the IV Additional Junior Civil Judge, Vijayawada, wherein the court below directed to attach the salary of the petitioner-garnishee. None appears for the 1st respondent/decree holder, despite service of notice. The petitioner/Deputy Commissioner (CT), Division-I is the garnishee. It is stated that the 1st respondent herein filed a suit in O.S.No.3155 of 2003 against the 2nd respondent herein on the file of the IV Additional Junior Civil Judge, Vijayawada, for recovery of money and during pendency of the suit, it appears that attachment before judgment prohibiting the employer of the 2nd respondent/defendant from making payment of a sum of Rs.1,09,656/- was ordered and, thereafter, the suit was decreed. The 1st respondent/decree holder filed E.P.No.27 of 2006 for execution of the decree. He also filed E.A.No.39 of 2007 in E.P.No.27 of 2006 in O.S.No.3155 of 2003 to issue show-cause notice to the petitioner herein/garnishee to explain as to why recovery proceedings shall not be initiated against him for not implementing the Court order passed in E.P.No.27 of 2006. The court below vide its order dated 15-07- 2009, allowed the said E.A. and directed to issue a show cause notice to the petitioner-garnishee as to why his salary should not be attached in order to realize the decretal amount. After receipt of notice in E.A.No.39 of 2007, the petitioner/garnishee submitted his explanation on 06-08-2009 stating that the judgment debtor had retired from service on 30-09-2004 on attaining age of superannuation, but on certain irregularities, his retirement benefits such as leave encashment, family benefit fund, Group Insurance, Gratuity and Commutation of pension were not paid except paying G.P.F. Charges were framed against the judgment debtor and Departmental enquiry has been initiated. Penalty proceedings are yet to be initiated against him by the Government. The department has taken general lien and first charge on the unpaid benefits to the judgment debtor, as the total amounts of about Rs.12,00,000/- that would render on account of National Savings Certificates were not handed over to the Department. Thus, it is stated that the Government would have the first charge over the amounts recoverable from the judgment debtor. As the petitioner failed to send the attached amount to the court below in spite of receiving notice, the court below vide its order, dated 08-10-2009, ordered to attach the salary of the petitioner/garnishee, as he being the garnishee of the judgment debtor. Aggrieved thereby, the present Civil Revision Petition is filed. Learned counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent submits that as this court granted stay of the impugned order, the decree holder has to choose other recourse to realize the said decretal amount from others i.e.sureties. I am not inclined to express any opinion with regard to the said contention. Insofar as compliance of the attachment order is concerned, this court is of the opinion that the petitioner-garnishee is bound to honour the Court’s order by recovering required amounts from the amounts payable to the Judgment Debtor that are available on which there was no lien or charge. However, as the enquiry proceedings are pending against the judgment debtor for recovery of penalty amount, non-compliance of the Court order by the petitioner/garnishee cannot be said to be illegal and deliberate, as the Government has got the first charge. Therefore, the impugned order is liable to be set aside. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is allowed setting aside the impugned order. There shall be no order as to costs. ___________ 30-12-2011 Prv