VIRENDRA JAIN Vs. NARESH DAYAL & OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CM No.7444/ 2010 in R.A.No.171/2010 Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. R.A. NO.171/2010 The petitioner/applicant has sought a review of order dated 19th February, 2010 whereby the Contempt Petition filed by the petitioner/applicant being Contempt Case (C) No.545 of 2008 was dismissed.

(2.) In the writ petition filed by the petitioner an order dated 21st September, 2007 was passed directing the respondents to make payments of amounts due to the petitioner. During the period, the petitioner was not present, the period had been treated as 'Dies non', and consequently, the amount for the period which was treated as 'Dies non' had not been paid. Petitioner/Applicant, therefore, filed an application invoking jurisdiction of the Court under Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 for a direction to the respondents to pay amounts due to him. This Court while passing the order dated 19th February, 2010 noticed that on account of the order passed treating the period of leave as 'Dies non' and fixing pay from 1st January, 1996 at Rs.8,000-13,500/-, it could not be held that there was any willful and intentional violation of order dated 21st September, 2007. While dismissing the Contempt Petition, it had also been clarified that the petitioner/applicant shall be entitled to take appropriate remedy against the order passed by the respondents for treating the period of leave as 'Dies non' and fixing pay from 1st January, 1996 at Rs.8,000-13,500/-.

(3.) The petitioner/applicant by the present application has again reiterated the facts and has contended that the respondents have converted certain periods of medical leave into 'Dies non' and has recovered Rs.46,570/- as intimated to the petitioner/applicant by order dated 14th November, 2008. The petitioner/applicant has also given in the grounds for review, details of the payments made to him, and has contended that the order dated 19th February, 2010 dismissing the Contempt Petition has an error of question of facts, as the Court has missed non-payment of all the dues which became payable to the petitioner/applicant.