Disposed

Sanjay Ray & Ors. v. R C Jain & Ors.

Delhi HC14 Jan 2016CONT.CAS(C)/499/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The single-judge court disposed of a contempt petition wherein petitioners sought directions for payment of outstanding salary and dues and furnishing of service books under a reinstatement order. The court framed steps for computation of dues and liberty to approach fresh remedies. (1 paragraph)

What did the court decide?

Petitioners directed to compute outstanding dues within two weeks; respondents to pass reasoned order within four weeks; liberty granted for fresh writ if dues not paid or service books not furnished.

Sanjay Ray & Ors. Vs R C Jain & Ors. — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Delhi HC (2016)

¶1

$~17

¶2

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- CONT.CAS(C) 499/2014, Rev. Pet.280/2015, CMs 1712/2015, 27893/2015

¶4

SANJAY RAY & ORS ..... Petitioners Through: Mr. V.N. Jha, Adv. versus

¶5

R C JAIN & ORS ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Dinesh Agnani, Sr. Adv. with Mr.Onkar Prasad, Adv. for R-1, R-2, R-3.

¶6

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.R. MIDHA

¶7

O R D E R

¶8

% 14.01.2016

¶9

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondents have not paid full salary and dues to the petitioners who were reinstated vide order dated 18^th November, 2013 in WP(C) 3869/1999 and were directed to be paid salaries and dues in terms of para 5 (b) and (d).

¶10

Learned senior counsel for the respondent submits that respondents have paid all the dues to the petitioners in terms of the order dated 18^th November, 2013.

¶11

On query by this Court as to how much amount is the outstanding, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners could not calculate the outstanding dues at the time of filing of the petition as the copy of the service book was not furnished to them. It is further submitted that on an application filed by the petitioners, the respondents furnished the copies of the service book to the 16 petitioners on 22^nd April, 2015 but with respect to the 4 petitioners (Shashi Bhushan Pandey, Ved Prakash Singh, Chandra Prakash and Pramod Kumar), the service book has not yet been furnished by

¶12

the respondents.

¶13

Learned senior counsel for the respondents submit that so far as the 16 petitioners are concerned, the copies of the service book were furnished to them as back as on 22^nd April, 2015 but the petitioners have not furnished the particulars of the outstanding dues till date. Learned senior counsel for the respondents submits that the remaining four petitioners being probationers, whose services were terminated, the copy of the service book cannot be furnished to them.

¶14

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners shall calculate the outstanding dues payable to them in terms of the order dated 18^th November, 2013 in WP(C) 3869/1999 and shall submit a fresh representation to the respondents to pay the outstanding dues to them within a period of two weeks. It is further submitted that the respondents be directed to take a decision on the petitioner’s representation within a period of four weeks and in the event of the failure of the respondents to pay the outstanding dues to the petitioners within a period of four weeks thereafter, the petitioners be given liberty to avail appropriate legal remedies against the respondents including the remedy of filing a fresh writ petition for recovery of the outstanding dues.

¶15

Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the petitioners shall demand the copies of the service book in respect of the four petitioners mentioned in para 3 above and in the event of the failure of the respondents to furnish the same, the petitioners be given liberty to agitate the same by way of fresh writ petition.

¶16

As agreed, all the petitioners shall make a fresh representation giving a computation of the outstanding dues payable to them by the respondents in terms of order dated 18^th November, 2013 in WP(C) 3869/1999 within a period of two weeks from today whereupon the respondents shall consider

¶17

the same and pass a reasoned order and communicate the same to the petitioners within a period of four weeks thereafter. The respondents shall pay the outstanding dues, if any, to the petitioners along with communication of their decision. The four petitioners mentioned in para 3 above are at liberty to demand the service book from the respondents in their representation. In the event of the petitioners’ grievance not being redressed by the respondents in accordance with law, the petitioners would be at liberty to avail appropriate legal remedies available to them in accordance with law including the filing of a fresh writ petition.

¶18

The contempt petition is disposed of in the above terms. The review petition and all the pending applications are also disposed of. Both the parties shall remain bound by the statements made before this Court today. 9. Copy of this order be given dasti to counsel for the parties under the signature of the Court Master.

¶19

J.R. MIDHA, J.

¶20

JANUARY 14, 2016 dk

Sanjay Ray & Ors. v. R C Jain & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sanjay Ray & Ors. v. R C Jain & Ors.

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

Jaswinder Kaur Vs Sukhbeer Singh

District & Sessions Courts Employees Welfare Association Delhi (Regd) Thr Deepak Bhardwaj & Ors. Vs a K Chawla & Anr.

M/S Jay Bharat Fertilizers Pvt. Ltd. Vs Anuj Kumar Bishnoi

Damini Kapoor Chintamani Vs Kartik Chintamani & Anr.

G Stalin Prabu & Ors. Vs Bimal Julka & Ors.

N C Bakshi Vs Anil Khanna & Ors.

Kk Jain Vs P.K.Gupta & Anr.

Jrn Rajasthan Vidyapeeth Deemed University Vs Uma Bali, Secy. University Grants Commission

M/S Mott Macdonald Private Ltd. Vs Union of India

Rajinder Kumar & Others Vs Jagdish Chander & Others

Jaswinder Kaur Vs Sukhbeer Singh

Savitri Devi Taneja Vs Dr Puneet Kumar Goel

Anil Kumar Jain Vs Mohd. Hussain

Rajvir Singh Vs Dr Puneet Kumar Goel