G.P. BHARGAVA Vs. SANJAY SHUKLA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner has filed the present contempt petition for voluntary disobedience of the order passed by this Court dated 04.03.2011 in W.P. No. 9098/2007 (S) and W.P. No. 1908/2010 (S).

(2.) This Court in W.P. No. 9098/2007(S) vide its order dated 04.03.2011 directed the respondents to count the entire period of service from 1968 to 31.10.2006 as qualifying service for the purpose of calculating pensionary benefits and also directed for re-fixation of pension of petitioner and arrears to be paid on such calculation within a period of two months from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order dated 04.03.2011. In W.P. No. 1908/2010(S) vide its order dated 04.03.2011 direction was given to the respondents to fix the pay of petitioner in the pay scale of Rs. 10,000-15,200 taking note of fact of pay drawn by petitioner on 01.01.1996. Arrears of such pay fixation may be granted to the petitioner as has been granted to other employees of SADA. Further, direction was given to consider the claim of petitioner for grant of Kramonnati as per the policy and decide the same by a speaking order. Circular dated 24.01.2008 is applicable in the case of petitioner. Arrears shall be payable to the petitioner as permissible on fixing his pay in accordance with the recommendation of Fifth Pay Commission w.e.f. 01.01.1996. It is pleaded by petitioner that aforesaid directions of this Court is voluntarily disobeyed by the respondents and, therefore, they have committed contempt of this Court.

(3.) Joint Director, Urban Administration and Development, Bhopal has filed his affidavit on 22.02.2013 and stated therein that order dated 04.03.2011 passed in WP No. 9098/2007(S) has been complied with. Directorate has passed an order dated 20.12.2011, by which period of service from initial appointment was counted and anticipated pension of Rs.14,485/- per month w.e.f. 01.11.2006. 90% of gratuity estimated to Rs. 4,78,021/- was also sanctioned subject to adjustment from the amount, which was to be recovered from petitioner. It is further stated on affidavit that petitioner is not an employee of Urban Administration and Development Department, but an employee of Housing Environment Department. Services of petitioner is not pensionable under Madhya Pradesh Nagar Palika Sewa Pension Niyam, 1980, as petitioner is employee of SADA, Pachmani. Urban Administration Development Department has wrongly paid sum of Rs.6,54,717/- as pension and said amount is recoverable from petitioner. State government has filed a review petition No.138/2013 for recall/modification of order dated 04.03.2011. Order for restoration of pension of petitioner has been passed on 20.02.2013 and arrears will be granted if review petition is dismissed.