Dismissed

Dr. Anil Kumar Shukla v. Amit Mohan Prasad Addl.Chief Prin.Secy.Medical/Health Luckno

Allahabad HC12 Dec 2022CAPL/1004/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment deals with a contempt application challenging non-compliance of a writ court order regarding subsistence allowance. While initial orders rejected compliance affidavits and issued notices, the High Court ultimately dismissed the application after the respondent filed a fresh affidavit showing a formal compliance order was passed and a bill was raised for payment.

What did the court decide?

Present contempt petition dismissed as it lost its efficacy due to fresh affidavit showing compliance order passed and bill raised; notice discharged.

Dr. Anil Kumar Shukla Vs Amit Mohan Prasad… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 19 Case :- CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 1004 of 2021 Applicant :- Dr. Anil Kumar Shukla Opposite Party :- Amit Mohan Prasad Addl.Chief Prin.Secy.Medical/Health Luckno Counsel for Applicant :- Hari Prasad Gupta,Chandan Srivastava,Deo Kant Tripathi,Pranshu Agrawal Counsel for Opposite Party :- C.S.C.

¶2

Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.

¶3

On 01.12.2022, the following order was passed which reads as under:

¶4

"Heard Shri S.K.Singh Chauhan, Advocate holding brief of Shri Pranshu Agarwal, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri Mohit Jauhari, learned Standing Counsel for the opposite party.

¶5

Notice was issued to the opposite party No.1 on 05.07.2021 and as per the Office report dated 11.08.2021, notice was served on the opposite party No.1.

¶6

On 06.07.2022 and 21.07.2022, following orders were passed:-

¶7

Order dated 06.07.2022

¶8

"Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Mayankar Singh, the learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the respondent, who submits that insofar as the interim order passed by the writ Court dated 18.12.2020 is concerned, the respondent has already passed a detailed order dated 10.08.2021. However, he is unable to inform whether the said order was placed before the writ Court and communicated to the petitioner.

¶9

List this matter again on 21.07.2022 to enable the learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel to give a clear statement and file an affidavit of competent authority as to why the order dated 10.08.2021 was not communicated to the petitioner and placed before the writ Court, if not done.

¶10

Order dated 21.07.2022

¶11

"Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Mr. Mayanker Singh, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel, who has filed an affidavit of compliance of Mr. Amit Mohan, Additional Chief Secretary, Medical Health and Family Welfare, Government of U.P. Lucknow.

¶12

Submission of learned counsel for the respondent is that the order could not be complied on account of certain legal impediment. In order to appreciate the aforesaid submission it would be necessary to take a glance of the order passed by writ court on 18.12.2020 which reads as under:

¶13

"Let counter affidavit be filed by the opposite parties in the matter positively within 4 weeks.

¶14

2 weeks thereafter shall be available to the petitioner for filing rejoinder

¶15

affidavit.

¶16

List thereafter.

¶17

In the meantime, if any subsistence allowance is payable to the petitioner for the period of suspension, the same shall be verified, calculated and paid to the petitioner before the next date of listing unless there is some legal impediment in which case, it shall be brought to the notice of the Court and the petitioner shall also be informed about it." The order is quite categoric in the sense that it was directed that if any subsistence allowance is payable to the petitioner for the period of suspension the same shall be verified, calculated and paid to the petitioner before the next date of listing. The petitioner by means of his letter dated 20.1.2022 enclosing the copy of the order passed by writ court was served on the respondent. It is the specific case of the petitioner that though the aforesaid order was served on the respondent yet no compliance has been made. It is in the aforesaid backdrop that on 6.7.2022 the contempt court had passed the following order which reads as under:

¶18

¶19

¶20

The court had specifically required the respondents to inform that the alleged order dated 10.08.2021 which is said to have been passed by the respondent, whether the same was informed to the petitioner or not.

¶21

It is in this view of the matter that the affidavit of compliance has been filed today wherein in para 8 it has been stated that the order dated 10.08.2021 was served on the petitioner only on 18.07.2022 i.e. apparently after almost eleven months of the alleged order having been passed and that too when the contempt Court had passed order on 6.7.2022. In para 9 it is clearly stated that till date no counter affidavit has been filed before the writ court.

¶22

Apparently taking into consideration the aforesaid submissions and the averments made in the affidavit of the respondent, it is clear prima facie that the order passed by writ court dated 18.12.2020 has not been complied with.

¶23

In this view of the matter, the alleged affidavit of compliance which has been filed is found to be unacceptable and is accordingly rejected.

¶24

Let notice be issued to Mr. Amit Mohan, Additional Chief Secretary, Medical Health and Family Welfare, Government of U.P. Lucknow to

¶25

show cause as to why he should not be punished for willful and deliberate disobedience of the order passed by writ court dated 10.12.2020, passed in Writ Petition No.8317 (SS) of 2020; Dr. Anil Kumar Shukla Vs. State of U.P. and others.

¶26

Steps for service of notice on respondent shall be taken within one week from today. List this case on 18th August, 2022, on which date he shall appear in person before this Court. "

¶27

As per the Office report, dated 17.08.2022, notice was served on the opposite party No.1 personally.

¶28

On 18.08.2022 and 20.09.2022, this Court had passed the following orders:-

¶29

"In pursuance of the order dated 21st July, 2022, respondent-Mr. Amit Mohan Prasad, Additional Chief Secretary, Medical Health and Family Welfare, Government of U.P., Lucknow is present before Court.

¶30

Compliance affidavit has been filed, however, the same is not satisfactory. 10 days' further time is granted to the respondent to file a comprehensive affidavit disclosing as to how many officials situated at par with the applicant, were found involved in NRHM scam and have been granted pension as well as subsistence allowance. List this case on 20.09.2022 within top 10 cases.

¶31

The Officer-respondent need not to appear on future dates, unless ordered otherwise.

¶32

Order dated 20.09.2022

¶33

Hard copy of the contempt application filed by learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record.

¶34

On 18.8.2022, following order was passed:-

¶35

¶36

¶37

The Officer-respondent need not to appear on future dates, unless ordered otherwise." Appearance of the Officer/respondent was exempted with the assurance that he will file a comprehensive affidavit of compliance but today, Sri Mohit Johari, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel informs that Amit Mohan Prasad, Addl. Chief Prin. Secy., Medical/Health, Lucknow has been transferred on 1.9.2022, therefore, affidavit of compliance could not be filed.

¶38

List this case on 29.9.2022 at 10:15 a.m.

¶39

Mr. Amit Mohan Prasad Addl. Chief Prin. Secy., Medical/Health, Lucknow shall appear before this Court and explain that why the affidavit as ordered on 18.8.2022 has not been filed."

¶40

Opposite party No.1-Mr. Amit Mohan Prasad, Additional Chief Secretary, Medical & Health, Civil Secretariat, Government of U.P., Lucknow has been transferred to the Department of Small and Medium Industries, U.P. as Addl. Chief Secretary, Government of U.P., Lucknow on 21.09.2022, but he filed Special Leave to Appeal (C) No (s).18160-18161 of 2022 against the order, dated 18.08.2022 and 20.09.2022 passed in present contempt application as mentioned above. The aforesaid Special Leave to Appeal was disposed of, on 11.11.2022 with a direction that it is open to the applicant to make all the relevant submissions in an appropriate manner before the High Court for consideration.

¶41

Order, dated 11.11.2022 passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Special Leave to Appeal (C) No (s).18160-18161 of 2022 (Amit Mohan Prasad vs. Anil Kumar Shukla), reads as under:-

¶42

"Having heard the learned senior counsel for the petitioner and having perused the material placed on record, we are not persuaded to considered interference in the impugned orders dated 18.08.2022 and 20.09.2022. However, we leave it open for the petitioner in making all the relevant submissions in an appropriate manner before the High Court for consideration.

¶43

Subject to the observations foregoing, these petitions stand dismissed.

¶44

All pending applications stand disposed of."

¶45

Shri Mohit Jauhari, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the opposite party submits that present contempt application lost its efficacy as the claim of the applicant was rejected by the Competent Authority, vide order dated 10.08.2021. He further submits that involvement of the applicant was found in criminal case, therefore, he was taken into custody on 13.07.2011, as a result, he was placed under suspension, vide office memo, dated 13.07.2011 and subsistence allowance was being paid 50 % of the salary and D.A. in accordance with Rule 53 of Financial Hand Book, Part (II to IV). As the suspension of applicant was prolonged not due to his act, then he was entitled subsistence allowance 75 % of salary and D.A. Applicant attained the age of superannuation on 31.10.2012 and provisional pension is being paid and he filed Writ Petition in the year 2020, claiming 75 % of the subsistence allowance and D.A. after completion of six months suspension period.

¶46

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that after completion of six months of suspension period, applicant was entitled 75 % of subsistence allowance and D.A. He further submits that order dated 10.08.2021 passed by opposite party No.1 was served to the applicant, on 18.07.2022. He further submits that false criminal case is going on against the applicant and till today charge has not been framed in the alleged criminal case.

¶47

Affidavit filed by opposite party No.1 on 21.07.2022 is hereby rejected.

¶48

List this case on 12.12.2022.

¶49

Opposite party Nos.1 and 2 are directed to file fresh affidavit of compliance explaining day to day action for compliance of the direction of this Court after service of the order, by the next date of listing, failing which, they shall appear in person before this Court on the date fixed.

¶50

Legal Remembrancer, U.P. is directed to place the record related to legal opinion for filing SLP in the present contempt application on the next date of listing.

¶51

Senior Registrar of this Court is directed to communicate this order to the Legal Remembrancer, U.P. and opposite party Nos.1 and 2, forthwith."

¶52

Mr. V.K. Shahi, Additional Advocate General assisted by Mr. Mohit Jauhari, learned counsel appearing for the State has filed AfÏdavit of Compliance duly sworn by Mr. Parth Sarthi Sen Sharma, Principal Secretary, Medical Health and Family Welfare, Government of U.P., Lucknow and has submitted that the order of the writ Court has already been complied by passing formal order dated 08.12.2022 for payment of subsistence allowance to the petitioner @ 75% and he also drew attention of this Court towards para 11 of the afÏdavit of compliance and has also placed the photocopy of the bill which was issued by the Head of the Department, sent to the treasury for payment of amounting Rs.3,50,387/-.

¶53

Learned counsel for the applicant does not dispute the fact that formal order has been passed incompliance of the order of the writ Court.

¶54

Considering the submission of Mr. V.K. Shahi, Additional Advocate General as well as learned counsel for the applicant and going through the contents of afÏdavit of compliance as the formal order for payment of subsistence allowance at the rate of 75 percent has already been passed by the competent authority and the bill has been raised before the treasury, therefore, the present contempt petition has lost its efÏcacy and it is dismissed accordingly,

¶55

Notice is hereby discharged.

¶56

Order Date :- 12.12.2022 KR

¶57

Digitally signed by RABINDRA KUMAR Date: 2022.12.14 18:28:54 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Dr. Anil Kumar Shukla v. Amit Mohan Prasad Addl.Chief Prin.Secy.Medical/Health Luckno

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dr. Anil Kumar Shukla v. Amit Mohan Prasad Addl.Chief Prin.Secy.Medical/Health Luckno

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

Dr. Pradeep Kumar Yadav Vs Prashant Trivedi , Prin. Secy. Apper Chief Secy. Ayush ANUBHAGH-1, Lko.

Mahendra Kumar Vs Sri Arvind Kumar Pandey, Joint Director of Secondary Education, Ayodhya and Others

Pawan Kumar Vs Sri Narendra Bhooshan, Prin. Secy. PWD Civil Secrtt. Lko.

Satya Narayan Vs Dr. Vijayendra Vice Chancellor, Acharya Narendra Deva Univ. of Agri. and Teco. Ayodhya and Another

Amit Kumar Prajapati Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Raj Kumar Mishra Vs Mani Ram Singh Zila Basic Shiksha Adhikari Gonda and Anr.