PARURAM TIWARI Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN so far as the State of Jharkhand and Dr. Vijay Bahadur Singh-Director Higher Education - who have been impleaded as respondent nos. 1 and 2, are concerned, no case for contempt against them is made out, as it is the university which had to make the payment and not the State. Hence, the contempt petition is dismissed against the respondent nos. 1 and 2.

(2.) IN so far as the stand of the counsel for the contemnor University through Vice-Chancellor and the Registrar is concerned, who are impleaded as respondent nos. 3 and 4, they have filed show cause stating that a sum of Rs. 14 lacs have been paid to the petitioner, which has been denied by the counsel appearing for the petitioner and he has submitted that the petitioner has received only Rs. 12 lacs. The counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that an additional sum of Rs. 14 lacs is payable by the contemnor-respondents towards the retiral dues.

(3.) I find substance in the contention of the counsel appearing for the university to the effect that the petitioner should establish his claim for an additional sum of Rs. 14 lacs, which he is claiming as the order sought to be implemented merely states that the retiral dues to the petitioner should be paid forthwith along with interest, but the same does not indicate as to what is the date on which the dues became payable with the rate of interest or the quantum of amount which is still payable by the University to the petitioner.