cp37.09.odt 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 37/2009 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 427/2008 (Smt. Manda Bhanudas Deshmukh vs. Sau. Sonali Bhoyar and others) Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. Court's or Judge's orders Mr. Y.P.Kaslikar, Advocate for Petitioner. Mr. M.L.Bhure, Advocate for Respondent No.1 & 2. Mr. Manoj Sable, Advocate,for Respondent no.3. Coram: R. K. Deshpande, J. Date : 9 th April, 2010 This petition complains about willful disobedience of the judgment and order dated 9th June, 2008 passed by this Court in Writ Petition No. 427/2008, wherein the statement of Learned Government Pleader was recorded as under; “3. Mr. Sambre, learned Government Pleader for Respondent Nos. 3 to 5, submits that respondents will consider the issue about non- implementation of the order of the Divisional Welfare Officer and also see that same is implemented, if not implemented earlier within a reasonable period. In view of the above referred statement made by Mr. Sambre, nothing survives in the petition. The petition is disposed of accordingly”. cp37.09.odt 2 2/- By an order of the Divisional Social Welfare Officer, passed on 2.6.2007, the petitioner was held entitled to the salary and other allowances for the period of 4 years and that was to be paid to the petitioner by deducting from the non-salary grants payable to the management by the Zilla Parishad. It has further been directed that thereafter all retiral benefits shall be calculated and paid regularly. The complaint in the instant contempt petition is that, the amount of salary and allowances for the period of 4 years have not been paid and the retiral benefits have also not been paid. 3/- This Court in its order dated 3rd August, 2009, recorded that an amount of RS.2,04,778/- has been paid to the petitioner after deducting the same from the non salary grant of respondent nos. 1 and 2 towards 4 years salary and allowances. It is not disputed that this amount has been received by the petitioner. However, the petitioner submits that the calculations is not correct and he is entitled to receive much more amount. Shri Bhure, learned counsel appearing for the management submits that the management has also not calculated the amount actually payable to the cp37.09.odt 3 petitioner and the amount paid to the petitioner is in excess of what he was entitled to. 4/- So far as question of payment of retiral benefit is concerned, in response to the order dated 5th April, 2010, the management has prepared all the papers and has submitted it to the Office of Respondent No.3 – Social Welfare Officer. Shri Bhure, the learned counsel for respondent nos. 1 and 2 submits that there is neither any defect nor any deficiency in submitting the papers and Shri Kaslikar, learned counsel for the petitioner agrees to this submission. Thus, the proposal in respect of payment of regular pension to the petitioner has been submitted to the Accountant General, Maharashtra-II, for sanction on 9.4.2010. Affidavit to that effect has been filed on record by the Respondent no.2 Secretary. The matter is thus being processed at the level of Accountant General, Maharashtra-II, for payment of pension and other retiral benefits admissible to the petitioner. 5/- In view of the fact that payment of Rs.2,04,778/- has already been made, which according to the respondents is full and final payment towards the 4 years salary and other cp37.09.odt 4 allowances payable to the petitioner for the period from 7.4.2010 to 31.5.2005, nothing survives in the complaint made by the petitioner about contempt of Court. However, if the petitioner is of the opinion that this amount is not adequate and he is entitled to receive much more than what is paid, then it is open for him to adopt all such remedies for recovery of such amount from the respondents. Similarly, if the management is of the opinion that the amount paid to the petitioner is in excess than what the petitioner is entitled to, then it is open for the management to calculate the same and adopt all such procedure permissible in law for recovery of the amount against the petitioner. 6/- The affidavit filed by Respondent no.2 Secretary is taken on record, showing that there is a complete compliance of the order passed by this Court. The matter is pending with the Accountant General, Maharashtra-II, Nagpur, for sanction of retiral benefits to the petitioner and the respondent Secretary of the Institution, who is present in the Court, makes a statement that she shall cooperate the petitioner for getting the entire retiral benefits released from the Accountant General, Maharashtra-II, Nagpur. cp37.09.odt 5 7/- In view of the aforesaid position, nothing survives in the contempt petition. The same is, therefore, disposed of. J UDGE Rvjalit