SURESH KUMAR MISRA Vs. ARUN KUMAR RAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This contempt appeal stems from impugned judgement and order dated 26.2.2013 passed by Hon'ble Single Judge of this court in Civil Misc. Contempt Application No. 6052 of 2012, Suresh Kumar Misra versus Deputy Labour Commissioner, U.P. Varanasi Region, Varanasi. By the impugned order Hon'ble Single Judge has withdrawn the notice issued u/s 12 of Contempt Of Courts Act(hereinafter referred to as the Act) and has refused to initiate contempt proceedings against the respondent, who is Deputy Labour Commissioner, Varanasi Region, Varanasi, by dismissing contempt petition filed by the appellant /applicant.

(2.) Recapitulating genesis of this appeal, as is evident from the personal affidavit filed by the appellant in above noted Contempt Application, it appears that the appellant/ applicant was appointed as a mechanic in M/S Rohit Automobiles (P) Ltd, Nardatpur, Jagatpur, district Varanasi on 10.3.2005, but he could remain in employment only for ten months and fifteen days as on 25.1.1996, his services were terminated by the employer on oral directions. According to appellant's case this was done without paying him any entitled amount u/s 6H, U.P. Industrial Disputes Act 1947, and without affording him any opportunity of hearing in flagrant violation of principals of natural justice, as is contemplated in principles of audi alterem partem. Consequently taking recourse to the available legal remedy, appellant/ applicant successfully filed a claim petition before the Labour Court , Varanasi Region, Varanasi, in as much as labour Court passed an award in his favour and against his employer, on 31.3.99, directing his reinstatement with complete back wages, by treating appellant/ applicant to be in continuous service without any break from the date of his termination ie: 25.1.96. M/S Rihit Automobiles (P) Ltd, Nardatpur, Jagatpur, district Varanasi, the employer, being aggrieved by the aforesaid award dated 31.3.99, challenged it in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 45464 of 1999, but he failed to secure any interim relief of stay and ultimately it remained unsuccessful, as it's said writ petition was dismissed by this court. It seems that pendent lite aforementioned Civil Misc. Writ Petition by the employer, an execution proceedings, u/s 6H(1), was initiated by the appellant/ applicant against the employer, before the respondent, for executing the award and hence employer again approached this court by filing another Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 32973 of 2000, M/S Rohit Automobiles (P) Ltd versus Suresh Kumar Misra and others, in which writ petition, after hearing both the sides, through their respecting counsel, this court directed the petitioner employer to deposit Rs. 1 lac with the respondent Deputy Labour Commissioner, Varanasi Region, Varanasi, who was further directed to invest the said deposit in an interest bearing fixed term deposit scheme, for a period of one year, in a nationalised bank, vide it's order dated 1.8.2000, which order is annexure no.1 to the appellant's affidavit. Employer's aforementioned second writ Petition No. 32973 of 2000, also met with the same fate of dismissal as that of the first, by Hon'ble Single Judge, after exchange of counter and rejoinder affidavits, on 25.1.2012, vide annexure no.2, to the appellant's affidavit by holding that-

(3.) To complete the chronology of sequence of events, it further transpires that armed with afore-reproduced order dated 25.1.2012, appellant/ applicant submitted an application, before the respondent, appending therewith the aforementioned order by this court dated 25.1.12, which was received by the respondent on 22.2.12, which is evident from annexure no.4, to the appellant's affidavit. Appellant/ applicant rue, in para 7 of his affidavit, that instead of Rs 2,73,447 to be paid to him he was paid only a sum of Rs. 1,55,317 and this claim was expressed through a slated chart of payments in that paragraph. It further transpires that since appellant/ applicant was not disbursed the amount claimed and calculated by him, as aforementioned, that he, for realising the same, preferred above noted Civil Misc. Contempt Application No. 6052 of 2012, Suresh Kumar Misra versus Deputy Labour Commissioner, U.P. Varanasi Region, Varanasi before the Hon'ble Single Judge of this court. From the impugned order dated 26.2.2013, it is perceivable that initially notice was issued to the respondent, but subsequently, Hon'ble Single Judge found that there was nothing in the orders passed in both the Civil Misc. Writ Petitions preferred by the employer, entitling the applicant/ appellant to a compound interest and that there was no wilful or deliberate violation of the writ order, that the Hon'ble Single Judge, discharged the notice and dismissed the contempt petition filed by the applicant/appellant. It is this order dated 26.2.2013, which is now under challenge before us in this appeal.