Disposed

Shakuntala Singh v. Sanjay Kumar Collector District Allahabad

Allahabad HC17 Jul 2019CAPL/4682/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This Court dismissed a contempt application for alleged non-compliance of a reinstatement order. The Court held that substantial compliance was achieved via the compliance affidavit regarding salary and increments and accepted an undertaking to pay pending court costs within one week.

What did the court decide?

Contempt application consigned to record; opposite party to pay costs within one week.

Shakuntala Singh Vs Sanjay Kumar Collector District… — Contempt of Court | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 40

¶2

Case :- CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 4682 of 2017

¶3

Applicant :- Shakuntala Singh Opposite Party :- Sanjay Kumar Collector District Allahabad Counsel for Applicant :- Hridaya Narain Shukla,Rajeev Ratan Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- C.S.C.

¶4

Hon'ble Manoj Kumar Gupta,J.

¶5

The instant contempt application has been filed alleging non compliance of the order dated 20.4.2017 passed by this Court in Writ-A no.9255 of 2017 Shakuntla Devi vs. State of U.P. and 2 others. The petitioner was given appointment on compassionate basis. Later on her service was terminated by order dated 4.2.2017 treating her to be a temporary employee. The case of the petitioner in the writ petition was that since her appointment was on compassionate basis, her service was permanent in nature. She could not be terminated by treating her to be a temporary employee. The Writ-Court accepted the submission of the petitioner and accordingly, the order impugned in the petition dated 4.2.2017 terminating the service of the petitioner was set aside and respondents were directed to reinstate the petitioner in service with all consequential benefits. This Court also awarded cost of Rs.20,000/- to be paid to the petitioner within six weeks. The judgement of the Writ-Court was subjected to challenge before Supreme Court by filing SLP but which was also dismissed on 29.3.2019.

¶6

An affidavit of compliance has been filed by opposite party No.3, the present incumbent on the post of District Magistrate, Allahabad. Paragraphs 7, 8 and 9 of the said affidavit in which it has been detailed as to how the order of the Writ-Court has been complied with, are quoted below :-

¶7

7. That, the services of petitioner were terminated by order dated

¶8

04.02.2017 and she was reinstated in January 2018 pursuant to which she joined on 23.01.2018, therefore, her salary from February 2017 to January 2018 was due to be paid. The salary for the aforesaid period amounting Rs.2,63,168/- has been paid to her in the month of March 2018. A copy of the bill with regard to the payment of salary of petitioner from February 2017 to January 2018 is annexed herewith and is marked as ANNEXURE1 to this affidavit.

¶9

8. That, the salary of petitioner of January 2008 was also not paid. In further compliance of the orders of the Hon'ble court, the petitioner's salary of January 2008 amounting Rs. 7309/- has been paid to her by transferring the aforesaid amount through e-transfer mode on 08.07.2019. A copy of the bill as well as e-transfer certificate with regard to payment of salary of January 2008 to the petitioner is annexed herewith and is marked as ANNEXURE-2 to this affidavit.

¶10

9. That, some increments of petitioner from July 2019 were due. The increments has been calculated from 01.07.2009 to 30.06.2019 and upon calculation of the same the total amount came as Rs. 4,51,650/-. The aforesaid amount Rs.4,51,650/- has been paid to petitioner by transferring the said amount in her blank account by transferring the said amount in her bank account by e-transfer mode on 08.07.2019. A copy of calculation chart along with e-transfer certificate with regard to aforesaid payment is annexed herewith and is marked as ANNEXURE-3 to this affidavit.

¶11

Counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant was entitled to pay grade of Rs.5200-20,200 as well as benefit under the ACP but which has not been given to her while calculating arrears and therefore full compliance of order of the Writ-Court has not been made. However, he does not dispute that prior to termination of her services, she was being paid the same amount as has been given to her now. Infact, perusal of paragraph 9 of the compliance affidavit reveals that the respondents themselves have also given increments and transferred a sum of Rs.4,51,650/- under the said Head.

¶12

In case fixation of salary of the applicant prior to termination of her service itself was incorrect or she was entitled to benefit of ACP, the same cannot

¶13

form subject matter of consideration in the instant contempt proceedings. It may give rise to a fresh cause of action before the authority. However, this Court is of the considered opinion that having regard to the stand taken in the compliance affidavit, there is substantial compliance of order of the Writ-Court.

¶14

At this stage, counsel for the applicant pointed out that cost of Rs.20,000/has not been paid to the applicant so far.

¶15

Learned standing counsel is not in a position to clarify the same. However, he states that in case cost as imposed by this Court has not been paid so far, the same would be paid by opposite party No.3 within one week from today. His statement is recorded and accepted.

¶16

Having regard to the above discussion and the undertaking given by learned standing counsel on behalf of opposite party no.3, this Court is not inclined to proceed any further in the instant matter.

¶17

The contempt application is consigned to record.

¶18

(Manoj Kumar Gupta, J.)

¶19

Order Date :- 17.7.2019

¶20

skv

Shakuntala Singh v. Sanjay Kumar Collector District Allahabad

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shakuntala Singh v. Sanjay Kumar Collector District Allahabad

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt. Mamta Chauhan Vs Lakhan Singh and 3 Others

Satish Kumar and 3 Others Vs Intezar and 5 Others

Suraj Singh Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Prashant Singh Vs Smt. Jyoti

Pratap Singh Vs Ram Ladaite

Ashok Kumar Vs Mohd. Riyaz and Another