Court No. - 59
Case :- CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 1599 of 2016 Applicant :- Dr. Kumud Dhar Tiwari Opposite Party :- Anoop Chandra Pandey, Principal Secry., Medical Education Counsel for Applicant :- Ram Awtar Counsel for Opposite Party :- S.C.,C.S.C.
Hon'ble Yashwant Varma,J.
On 26 February 2018, this Court had passed the following order: “Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Shri K.R. Singh, the learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel.
It is not disputed that on 4 August 2015, a writ petition preferred by the applicant came to be allowed in the following terms: "It is agreed between the parties that the issue pertaining to the addition of the services rendered on adhoc basis by the petitioner for the purposes of computation of pension stands decided in his favour under the judgment and order of this Court dated 1.3.2012 in Writ Petition No. 61974 of 2011 ( Dr. Amrendra Narain Srivastava Vs. State of U.P. and others).
For the reasons recorded in the said writ petition, present writ petition is also allowed on the same terms.The impugned order dated 13.3.2012, to the extent it denies pension to the petitioner, is hereby set aside. Let the respondents determine the pension of the petitioner in light of the judgment passed in Writ Petition No. 61974 of 2011. The State Government will calculate his pension and issue the pension payment order within two months. The entire arrears of pension shall be paid over to him within a period of three months. The petitioner shall also be entitled to interest at the rate of 6% from the date pension was due till the date of its actual payment, in respect of the arrears."
Alongwith the affidavit of compliance, the respondents have brought on record an order dated 8 February 2016 negativing the claim of the applicant for inclusion of ad hoc service for the purposes of computation of pension. The Court pointed out to Shri K.R. Singh, the learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel, that since the order has been passed on consent, the issue which would therefore arise would be whether such a stand or position could have been possibly taken by the opposite party.
Faced with this situation, Shri Singh sought time to obtain further instructions and file a further affidavit stating therein whether the respondents would decide to revisit the order dated 8 February 2016. On his request, the matter is adjourned.
List again after three weeks. The affidavit may be filed in the meanwhile.”
Pursuant thereto a further affidavit of compliance has been filed and appended thereto is an order dated 5 April 2018 in terms of which the opposite party has revisited his earlier decision and taken the view that the adhoc services rendered by the applicant are liable to be included for the purposes of computation of pension.
Sri K.R. Singh, the learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel states that all consequential action and disbursement in light of the order dated 5 April 2018 shall be made and effected within a period of two months from today. The statement so made is recorded and accepted.
Consequently nothing further survives on this petition which shall stand disposed of.
Order Date :- 27.4.2018 LA/-