Disposed

Triloki Nath Srivastava v. Praveer Kumar Prin. Sec. Nagar Vikas and Anr.

Allahabad HC18 Nov 2019CAPL/2740/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a contempt application where the applicant failed to appear to press the matter despite a previous order directing compliance verfication, the court disposed of the application. The applicant was directed to raise specific grievances regarding allowances before the competent authority.

What did the court decide?

Contempt application disposed of; applicant directed to raise grievances regarding HRA and CCA before competent authority.

Triloki Nath Srivastava Vs Praveer Kumar Prin. Sec… — Contempt of Court | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 5

¶2

Case :- CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 2740 of 2012

¶3

Applicant :- Triloki Nath Srivastava Opposite Party :- Praveer Kumar Prin. Sec. Nagar Vikas And Anr. Counsel for Applicant :- Yasharth,Nitin Yasharth Counsel for Opposite Party :- M.N.Singh,SC

¶4

Hon'ble Surya Prakash Kesarwani,J.

¶5

List revised. Case called out. No one appears on behalf of the petitioner to press this application.

¶6

On 07.08.2013, this court passed the following order:-

¶7

"Vide order dated 2.7.2013, the opposite parties were given an opportunity to comply with the order of the Writ Court or appear in person.

¶8

Today an affidavit termed as Affidavit of Compliance has been filed on behalf of Sri C.B.Paliwal, Principal Secretary, Nagar Vikas, U.P.Govt.Lucknow as well as Sri Narendra Kumar Singh, Director, Local Bodies, U.P. Lucknow. Another Affidavit of Compliance has been filed by Sri Raghvendra Vikram Singh, Nagar Ayukta, Nagar Nigam, Allahabad, which are taken on record.

¶9

A cheque dated 29.7.2013 amounting to Rs. 8,8,648/- drawn on UCO Bank, Allahabad has been handed over to Sri Yasharth, learned counsel for the applicant by Sri M.N.Singh, learned counsel appearing for Nagar Ayukta, Allahabad, which has been accepted by him under protest. He contends that the difference between House Rent Allowance and City Compensatory Allowance due to revision of pay have not been accounted for. It is also contended that interest at the rate of 4% per annum on delayed payment is illegal and he is entitled to payment of interest at the rate of 9% per annum.

¶10

In so far as interest is concerned, the Court finds that there is no direction of the Writ Court to determine interest on delayed payment nor there is any earlier order passed in the contempt proceedings to the effect. In the circumstances, the Court finds that payment of interest at the rate of 4% on delayed payment is sufficient and in compliance of the order of the Writ Court and the opposite parties can not be charged for the same. However with regard to difference in House Rent Allowance and City Compensatory Allowance due to pay revision, it is not clear whether the same is accounted for in the payment or not. The applicant as well as Nagar Ayukta may file their affidavits clarifying the position within three weeks.

¶11

List this matter after three weeks."

¶12

An affidavit of compliance dated 27.08.2019 has been filed by the opposite party No.4 in which in paragraphs 6, 7 & 8, the opposite party no.4 has stated as under:

¶13

"6. That all the retrial dues alongwith interest has been paid to the applicant and it is also relevant to mention herein that the applicant is not entitled for CCA (City Compensatory Allowances) and HRA for the period he was not in service.

¶14

7. That the Municipal Commissioner, Nagar Nigam Allahabad vide his letter

¶15

dated 29.7.2013 informed to the Director, Local Body, Directorate, U.P. Lucknow that the applicant has been given all his retired dues alongwith interest and the amount has already been disclosed in the letter i.e. Rs.8,08,648/-. A true Photostat copy of the letter dated 29.7.2013 is being annexed herewith and marked as Annexure-2 to this affidavit.

¶16

8. That vide letter dated 5.8.2013, the then Director, Local Body, Directorate, U.P. Lucknow informed to the applicant that all his retired dues has been paid to the applicant at the level of the Directorate. A True Photostat copy of the letter dated 5.8.2013 is being annexed herewith and marked as Annexure-3 to this affidavit. "

¶17

On 17.10.2019, this Court passed the following order:-

¶18

"In compliance of the order dated 13.8.2019 the affidavit of compliance is filed by newly impleaded opposite party nos. 3 and 4.

¶19

As prayed by Sri Yasharth, learned counsel for the applicant three weeks' time is allowed to file the reply/ counter affidavit to the affidavit of compliance.

¶20

List in the week commencing 18th November 2019."

¶21

From the records before me, it does not appear that applicant has filed any reply/counter affidavit to the affidavit of compliance.

¶22

In view of the facts mentioned above and also the fact that none appears on behalf of the applicant to press this contempt application, I do not find any good reason to keep this contempt application pending.

¶23

In view of the aforesaid, the contempt application is disposed of leaving it open to the applicant to raise his grievances before the competent authority regarding his House Rent Allowance and City Compensatory Allowance for the period during which he was not in service.

¶24

Order Date :- 18.11.2019/vkg

Triloki Nath Srivastava v. Praveer Kumar Prin. Sec. Nagar Vikas and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Triloki Nath Srivastava v. Praveer Kumar Prin. Sec. Nagar Vikas and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sukkhhoo Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Pankaj Kumar Jain Vs Mahendra Kumar (Since Deceased) and 7 Others

Smt. Jayanti Devi Pandey Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Ashutosh Gupta Vs Raj Kumar

Dushyant Kumar Gaur Vs Smt. Sushma Govil Secretary Committee of Management and Anr.

Angad Singh and Others Vs Sri Radha Charan