Court No. - 10
Case :- CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 6277 of 2019 Applicant :- Pramod Kumar Opposite Party :- Vinay Kumar Pandey, Director Of Education ( Madhyamik) U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- R. K. Singh Kaosik Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J. Heard learned counsel for the applicant.
By order dated 17.11.2018 passed in Writ A No. 1885 of 2017 filed by the applicant, the Court directed as under:
"It is provided that in case an option is not exercised by the employee concerned, it will presumed that he has opted for revised pay structure and therefore, benefit of 5th and 6th Pay Commission reports would be due. The denial of revised pay scale, due to absence of consent, therefore, cannot be culled out from the Government Order itself.
In para 5 of the counter affidavit, it is stated that benefit of 5th and 6th Pay Commission reports has not been extended to the petitioner as he had not exercised option, in terms of the same Government Order dated 08.12.2008.
Relevant portion of the Government Order dated 08.12.2008 has already been extracted above. The Government Order clearly provides that in case option is not exercised, as is indicated therein, it would be presumed that benefit of revised pay scale has been opted by the employee concerned. This clause appears to have been completely omitted / misconstrued by the Director of Education while passing the order impugned itself. Consequently, the order passed by the Director on 07.09.2016 cannot be sustained.
Consequently, the writ petition succeeds and is allowed. The order dated 07.09.2016 stands quashed. The authorities are, moreover, directed to compute the benefits admissible to the petitioner under the 5th and 6th Pay Commission reports, in terms of the Government Order dated 08.12.2008 and release the benefits to the petitioner, within a period of four months from the date of presentation of a certified copy of this order.
Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that petitioner has been denied his entitlement as per the Government Order applicable and also, harassed on account of misconceived interpretation of the Government Order, and has been forced to approach this Court in respect of a grievance which ought not to have arisen, at all. Interest, accordingly, is also claimed on the withheld amount at the Bank rate of interest.
This Court finds substance in such contention. Petitioner, therefore, shall also be entitled to interest @ 6% per annum on the amount which was illegally denied to him over this period. Amount payable towards interest shall also be released within the same period. "
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that a certified copy of the aforesaid order was submitted for compliance before the opposite party but the opposite party has wilfully not complied with the order and, thus, has committed civil contempt liable for punishment under Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.
Prima facie a case of contempt has been made out. However, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, one more opportunity is afforded to the opposite party to comply with the aforesaid order of the Court within six weeks from the date of production of a certified copy of this order.
The applicant shall supply a duly stamped registered envelope addressed to the opposite party and another self-addressed stamped envelope to the office within one week from today. The office shall send a copy of this order along with the self- addressed envelope of the applicant with a copy of contempt application to the opposite party within one week thereafter and keep a recorded thereof.
The opposite party shall comply with the directions of the writ court and intimate him of the order through the self-addressed envelop within a week thereafter.
With the aforesaid observations, this application is disposed of at this stage with liberty to the applicant to move a fresh application, if the order is not complied with by the opposite party within the stipulated time as aforementioned.
Order Date :- 26.9.2019 Jaswant