(Per : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI)
1. This contempt petition has been filed complaining non-compliance of the directions contained in order dated 26.7.2011 passed by the Division Bench of this Court in Special Civil Application No.7292 of 2011.
2. The applicant, employee of BSNL, had approached Central Administrative Tribunal, Ahmedabad by filing Original Application NO.130 of 2010. Such petition along with other connected petitions came to be disposed of by the Central Administrative Tribunal by an order dated 10.12.2010. Certain benefits were made available to the applicant. BSNL challenged the order of the Tribunal before this Court. Division Bench of this Court by the above-referred order dated 26.7.2011 partially allowed the petition of BSNL and gave the following directions:-
"7. In the result, these petitions succeed in part and the orders passed by the Tribunal insofar as it directs reinstatement and payment of salary from the date of the order passed by the Sessions Court is set aside. The respondents shall be entitled to reinstatement and payment of salary from the date of the order of the Tribunal i.e. from 10.12.2010. The petitioner shall comply with the order of the Tribunal within a period of two months from today. Direct service is permitted."
3. On the premises that such directions were not complied with, this contempt petition was filed, for which we had issued notice on 15.2.2011, making it returnable today.
4. Learned counsel Shri Ketan Dave for the respondents stated, on instructions, that in compliance of the directions issued by the Division Bench of this Court, the applicant has already been paid an amount of Rs.58,190/- vide cheque dated 17.12.2011. Learned counsel for the applicant does not dispute such payment. He, however, contended that since the applicant has been, in the meantime, retired with effect from 31.1.2011, the respondents were also required to release his retiral benefits, including pension on the basis of the order passed by this Court. He drew our attention to the order of this Court, in which, the factum of retirement of the applicant during the pendency of the petition came to be noted.
5. To our mind, the question of pensionary and other retiral benefits of the applicant was never at issue before the Central Administrative Tribunal or before this Court. This Court, therefore, had obviously not made any observation with respect to the pensionary and retiral benefits, neither granted any direction in his favour.
6. If for the reason, the applicant considers that the employer has illegally not finalized his post-retiral benefits, it would always be open for him to challenge the same in accordance with law. In the present contempt, however, no further steps are required to be taken.
7. With the above observations, this petition is disposed of.
(AKIL KURESHI, J.) (C.L.
SONI, J.) omkar Top