Bhagwati Prasad Pandey and Another v. Sri. B.L. Mina, Prin. Secy. Cooperative, Govt. of U.P., Civil Sectt. Lko. and Others

Court No. - 4 Case :- CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 2988 of 2023 Applicant :- Bhagwati Prasad Pandey And Another Opposite Party :- Sri. B.L. Mina, Prin. Secy. Cooperative, Govt. Of U.P., Civil Sectt. Lko. And Others Counsel for Applicant :- Daya Shankar Yadav Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.

¶1Heard Sri Daya Shankar Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Pawan Kumar Maurya, learned Standing Counsel.

¶2Sri Pawan Kumar Maurya has filed the affidavits of compliance on behalf of opposite parties nos. 2 and 4, the same are taken on record.

¶3This Court has passed the order dated 15.09.2023 which reads as under: "1. Heard.

¶2The present contempt petition has been filed for violation of the order dated

16.12.2019 passed in Service Single No.35025 of 2019.

¶3This is a case where for execution of the order of the writ court, the petitioners have filed two contempt petitions, one contempt petition is bearing Contempt No.1036 of 2017 and another contempt petition is bearing Contempt No.789 of 2020. The first contempt petition was disposed of for the reason that the learned Standing Counsel has stated that the order of the writ court has been complied with. However, in compliance of the aforesaid order, the petitioners were being paid their regular pension but after some time, the payment of pension was stopped, therefore, the petitioners have filed another contempt petition. The another contempt petition was disposed of on 01.03.2023 (Annexure No.5) on the basis of statement of learned Standing Counsel that the petitioners are being paid their pension regularly. However, the learned counsel for the petitioners had got no instructions at that point of time.

¶4Shri Daya Shankar Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioners has stated that the petitioners are not being paid their pensions w.e.f. May, 2023 as recital with this effect that in para 23 of the contempt petition.

¶5Issue notice to opposite party nos.2 and 4 returnable at an early date, for which, necessary steps be taken within a week.

¶6Office to proceed accordingly.

¶7List this case on 11.10.2023 within top ten cases."

¶4Sri Maurya has submitted that in compliance of the order of Writ Court, the petitioners are being paid regular pension.

¶5Sri Daya Shankar Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioners has stated that on account of contemptuous conduct of the authorities, the petitioners were bound to file two contempt petitions. He has shown his apprehension that if this contempt petition is disposed of finally for the reason that the order of the Writ Court has been complied with as the petitioners are now getting their regular pension, they may again repeat their earlier misconduct by not making the payment of regular pension to the petitioners.

¶6Having considered the aforesaid submissions of Sri Daya Shankar Yadav, it is hereby observed that if in any case, in future, the opposite parties stop for making payment of regular pension to the petitioners, the petitioners may file any appropriate application in the present contempt petition and in that case, this contempt petition shall be revived. If this Court finds that the payment of regular pension of the petitioners is stopped, any coercive orders may be passed against the erring opposite party/parties and erring opposite party/parties may be punished under the Contempt of Courts Act.

¶7In view of the aforesaid observations, the present contempt petition is dismissed.

¶8Notices are discharged. [Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.] Order Date :- 11.10.2023 kkv/ High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench