Intaz Ali v. Rakesh Sethi and Anr

PageoNo.#o1/3 GAHC010175852021 ooooooo ooooooooooooooo ooooooooooooooooTHEoGAUHATIoHIGHoCOURTo (HIGHoCOURToOFoASSAM,oNAGALAND,oMIZORAMoANDoARUNACHALoPRADESH)o CaseoNo.o:oCont.Cas(C)/409/2021o INTAZoALIo S/OoLT.oSHAHIMoUDDIN,oVILL.oKANDHBARI,oP.S.oMUKALMUA,oP.O.o KANDHBARI,oDIST.oNALBARI,oASSAM,oPINo781126 VERSUSo RAKESHoSETHIoANDoANR.o S/OoSH.oVASDEVoSETHI,oPRESENTLYoSERVINGoASoDEPUTYoINSPECTORo GENERALoOFoPOLICEoINoTHEoOFFICEoOFoGROUPoCENTREoCRPF,o GUWAHATIo(ASSAM) 2:CHARANoSINGH oCOMMANDANTo20THoBATTALION oCRPFoAToBIRLAoCAMP oDIPHU oDIST.oKARBIoANGLONG oASSAMo AdvocateoforotheoPetitionerooooo:oMR.oMoUoMAHMUDo AdvocateoforotheoRespondento:oMRoHoGUPTAo(R-1,2)oo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo BEFORE HON'BLE,MR.,JUSTICE,SOUMITRA,SAIKIA o O1R1D1E1R o

11.09.2023. o Page No.# 2/3 None appears for the petitioner on call. On 01.09.2023 also none had appeared for the petitioner when the matter was called up. Mr. H. Gupta, learned counsel appears for the respondents. This Contempt Petition is filed by the petitioner alleging willful disobedience of the order dated 03.02.2021, passed in WP(C) No.7838/2019. By the said order, the following directions was issued: "03.02.2021 Heard Mr. M.U. Mahmud, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. H. Gupta, learned counsel appearing for C.G.C. Mr. H. Gupta, learned counsel appearing for C.G.C. submits that pay of the petitioner No. 1 has been fixed at Rs.56,900/- and he has been paid the said amount and the same is reflected in the affidavit filed by the respondents on

05.10.2020. Mr. H. Gupta, learned counsel appearing for CGC also submits that the pay of the petitioner No. 2 has been fixed at Rs.55,200/- and he has been paid the said amount and the same is reflected in the additional affidavit filed by the respondents. He further submits that the revised pension payable to both the petitioners has been finalized. The learned C.G.C. has submitted letters dated

07.10.2020 and 08.10.2020, issued by the Office of the Deputy Director(A/Cs) CRPF, New Delhi, Home Affairs, which shows that the PPO of the petitioners have been issued for payment of their pensions. In view of the submissions and documents mentioned above, the writ petition is closed as infructuous. The letters dated 07.10.2020 and 08.10.2020 are made a part of the record and marked as Annexures X & Y respectively".

Today when the matter is called, Mr. H. Gupta, learned C.G.C., appearing for the respondents submits before the Court that the amounts due to the petitioner being Rs.91,821/- (Rupees ninety one thousand eight hundred and twenty one), Rs.55,078/- (Rupees fifty five thousand seventy eight) and Rs.3,16,586/- (Rupees three lakh sixteen thousand five hundred eighty six) has since been released in respect of the petitioner. Mr. Gupta has placed before this Court, the communication to that effect, received from the respondent authorities. Page No.# 3/3 Upon due perusal of the communication received, it is seen that by order dated

03.02.2021, passed in the WP(C) No.7838/2019, the Writ Petition was closed as infructuous on the statements made by the learned counsel appearing for the respondents and who also represents the Respondents in the present Contempt Petition, that the revised pension has been finalized and the Pension Payment Orders (PPO) of the petitioner have already been issued for payment of his pension. That apart, by the communication dated 13.07.2022, copy of which is furnished before the Court also encloses the documents showing the release of pay fixation/MSAP arrear in respect of the petitioner, for an amount of Rs.55,078/- (Rupees fifty five thousand seventy eight) and the said amount has been shown to be credited to the Bank Account of the petitioner. In that view of the matter, taking into consideration the submissions made by the learned counsel for the Respondents, and also upon perusal of the order dated 03.02.2021, passed in WP(C) No.7838/2019, no cause arises in the Contempt Petition to proceed against the respondents. Contempt Petition therefore stands closed. Notices issued are recalled.

JUDGE Comparing Assistant