Disposed

Ananda Deka v. Sri Siddharth Singh and 2 Ors.

Gauhati HC6 Sept 2022Cont.Cas(C)/188/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a contempt petition alleging non-compliance with a Division Bench order directing payment of pension and salary arrears, the court noted substantial compliance pending a specific deadline payment. The petition was closed with a direction for immediate arrears payment.

What did the court decide?

Directed payment of arrears with 7% interest by 30.09.2022 and regular revised pension from September 2022. Contempt petition closed and notice dropped.

Ananda Deka Vs Sri Siddharth Singh and 2 Ors. — Contempt of Court | Gauhati HC (2022)

¶1

Page No.# 1/4

¶2

GAHC010063182022

¶3

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

¶4

Case No. : Cont.Cas(C)/188/2022

¶5

ANANDA DEKA

¶6

S/O. LT. JANI RAM DEKA, R/O. HOUSE NO. 46, RUDRAPUR PATH, BYELANE OF CHANDRA CHOUDHURY PATH, BHETAPAR, P.O. BELTOLA, GUWAHATI781028, KAMRUP (M), ASSAM.

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

SRI SIDDHARTH SINGH AND 2 ORS

¶9

I.A.S. COMMISSIONER AND SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE DEPTT., DISPUR, ASSAM SECRETARIAT, 4TH FLOOR, (A) BLOCK, GUWAHATI-06.

¶10

2:GULJARI LAL (IA AND AS) PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTS OFFICER (A AND E) MAIDAMGAON BELTOLA GUWAHATI-28.

¶11

3:GANESH DEKA

¶12

JOINT DIRECTOR OF HEALTH SERVICES (T) S.H.T.O. PATHARKUWARI NARENGI GUWAHATI-71

¶13

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. J PATOWARY

¶14

Advocate for the Respondent : MR. S K MEDHI

¶15

BEFORE

¶16

Page No.# 2/4

¶17

HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOUMITRA SAIKIA

ORDER

06-09-2022

R.M. Chhaya, C.J.

Heard Mr. J. Patowary, learned counsel for the petitioner; Mr. B. Gogoi, learned counsel for the respondents No. 1 & 3 and Mr. S.K. Medhi, learned counsel for the respondent No. 2.

¶22

A Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide Judgment and Order dated 23.11.2021 passed the following order in W.A. No. 290/2021:

¶23

“ 11. In view of the above, the writ appeal succeeds. The order dated 27.09.2021 passed by the learned Single Judge in WP(C) 4416/2016 is hereby set aside. We direct the respondent no. 1, i.e. Commissioner and Secretary to the Government of Assam, Health & Family Welfare (A) Department, to recalculate the entire financial benefit, which will now accrue to the writ petitioner/appellant, right from the date of the amalgamation notification, or from the date when the benefit was given to the similarly situated persons in terms of the amalgamation order, as the case may be, and thereafter he will send the relevant papers to the respondent no. 5, i.e. Accountant General, Assam, so that the arrears of salary can be given to the writ petitioner/appellant. Meanwhile, the Accountant General, Assam, shall also recalculate the pension and other post-retirement benefits which are liable to be paid to the writ petitioner/appellant in terms of the above.

¶24

12. We make it clear that the financial benefit accruing to the writ petitioner/appellant in terms of this order be given to the petitioner within a period of ninety days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of the order by the Commissioner and Secretary to the Government of Assam, Health & Family Welfare (A) Department. In case the arrears are paid to the petitioner/appellant beyond a period of 90 days, it shall carry an interest of 7% per annum on the arrears, which shall be calculated from the date on which 90 days were completed.”

¶25

Page No.# 3/4

¶26

The said order was subject matter of a review petition and vide order dated 10.12.2021, the same was clarified as under:

¶27

“This application has been filed for correction of the typographical errors regarding the dates of appointment and retirement of the applicant/appellant that have occurred in the order dated 23.11.2021 passed in WA 290/2021, wherein date of appointment of the applicant/appellant has been wrongly mentioned as “13.01.1997” instead of “13.01.1977” and the date of his retirement has been wrongly mentioned as “25.09.2012” instead of “25.05.2012”

¶28

Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and on perusal of the averments made in the application, the prayer for correction is allowed. Accordingly, the date of appointment of the applicant/appellant be read as “13.01.1977” in place of “13.01.1997” and his date of retirement be read as “25.05.2012” in place of “25.09.2012”.

¶29

This interlocutory application is, accordingly, allowed.

¶30

This order shall form a part of the order dated 23.11.2021 passed in WA 290/2021.”

¶31

By this petition under Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, the applicant has brought to the notice of this Court that the direction issued by the Division Bench has not been complied with.

¶32

On notice being served to the respondents, Mr. B. Gogoi, learned Standing Counsel, Health Department has appeared on behalf of the respondent Nos. 1 and 3 and Mr. S.K. Medhi, learned counsel has appeared on behalf of the respondent No. 2 .

¶33

Mr. S.K. Medhi, learned counsel for the respondent No.2 has placed before this Court a communication dated 30.08.2022 issued by Accountant General (A&E), Assam to the Treasury Officer, Dispur with regard to payment of revised pension etc. in respect of Shri Ananda Deka, Retd. Lab Asstt. The same is taken on record.

¶34

Mr. B. Gogoi, learned Standing Counsel for the Health Department submits that appropriate steps shall be taken to see that the arrears are paid to the applicant along with interest. He further submits that from the month of September, 2022 regular revised pension shall be paid to the original petitioner/

¶35

Page No.# 4/4

¶36

applicant herein.

¶37

It appears that there is substantial compliance of the directions issued by this Court. However, it is further directed that the arrears along with 7% interest as provided in the order dated 23.11.2021 shall be paid to the applicant latest by 30.09.2022 and the Authority shall pay regular revised pension as per the communication dated 30.08.2022 of the Accountant General (A&E), Assam to the applicant regularly.

¶38

The contempt petition is closed.

¶39

The notice is dropped.

¶40

JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE

¶41

Comparing Assistant

Ananda Deka v. Sri Siddharth Singh and 2 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ananda Deka v. Sri Siddharth Singh and 2 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

Sathil Deka Vs Borsing Rongpi and Anr.

Bhabani Laskar Vs Sri Adil Khan

Uddipta Bharadwaj Vs Preetom Saikia and 3 Ors.

Atowar Rahman @ Atowar Hussain and 10 Ors. Vs Minakhsi Sundaram and 63 Ors.

The Union of India and 4 Ors. Vs Subodh Kumar Singh

Nipendra Kr. Deka Vs Narayan Chandra Das and 5 Ors.

Parthapratim Phukan Vs Guru Prasad Talukdar

Md. Imdadul Islam and Anr. Vs Dr. Bijoya Choudhury and 3 Ors.

Smti Bijaya Sahu, Vs the United India Insurance Co. Ltd. and 4 Ors.

Xxx Vs the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Luthfa Begum Laskar Vs the State of Assam and Ors.

Aanachar Ali @ Ansar Ali @ Anchar Ali and 4 Ors. Vs Atikur Rahman and Anr.

The Union of India and 4 Ors. Vs Utsab Deb