(Per : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI) In response to our orders dated 18.4.2012 and 2.5.2012, respondent has remained present before the court and filed affidavit dated 3.5.2012. Along with the affidavit, he has also produced a communication dated 30th April 2012 issued to the applicant indicating that the applicant has to surrender a sum of Rs.3,44,083/- towards employer's contribution of CPF with 6% interest. This communication also records that upon such amount being returned, as per the order of the Court, pension for the month of April 2012 would become payable. It is also recorded that the said arrangement is subject to the outcome of Letters Patent Appeal that the Nagarpalika may file.
Though the above communication records that pension for the month of April 2012 will be released after the applicant surrenders the CPF amount, the learned counsel for the respondent pointed out that awaiting such surrender and subject to the applicant doing so, the respondent is ready and willing to start paying the pension prospectively. For such purpose, respondent has brought a cheque of Rs.8,896/- towards pension for the month of April 2012. Counsel for the respondent drew our attention to the apology tendered by the respondent in the affidavit. Additionally, he also orally conveyed to the court that past lapse be condoned.
Counsel for the applicant submitted that the amount indicated by the respondent towards CPF shall be returned latest by 25th May 2012. Counsel for the respondent stated that on condition that the applicant returns the amount as promised, the respondent shall continue to pay the pension unless stay is granted against the decision of the learned Single Judge by the LPA Bench. Payment of arrears of pension can be gone into once the appeal proceedings are disposed of.
In view of the above above developments, we do not need to keep the present contempt petition alive any longer. The same is disposed of accordingly. Before closing, we would like to record that in view of the stand taken by the respondent before us today, we refrain from looking deeper into the contempt allegations. The order preventing the respondent from drawing his salary is also lifted. Notice is discharged.
(Akil Kureshi J.) (C.L.Soni, J.) (vjn) Top