Disposed

Rustam Singh v. C. Paulrasu and Anr.

Himachal Pradesh HC12 Sept 2024COPC/113/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Contempt proceedings over non-implementation of a judgment directing payment of actual salary for one year as Agriculture Extension Officer, with 6% interest on default. Salary arrears of Rs.70,980 were paid; court accepted undertaking to pay interest within three weeks and closed the contempt proceedings.

What did the court decide?

Notices to respondents discharged; contempt proceedings closed; petitioner free to pursue remedy for interest if unpaid.

Rustam Singh Vs C. Paulrasu and Anr. — Contempt of Court | Himachal Pradesh HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

¶2

COPC No.113 of 2024

¶3

Decided on: 12^th September, 2024

¶4

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Rustam Singh …..Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

Sh. C. Paulrasu and another .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Coram

¶7

Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua

¶8

Whether approved for reporting?¹

¶9

For the Petitioner: Ms. Anuja Mehta, Advocate vice Mr. Karan Kapoor, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Y.P.S. Dhaulta and Mr. L.N. Sharma, Additional Advocates General with Mr. Sikander Bhushan, Deputy Advocate General. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

¶10

Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge

¶11

The petitioner has alleged violation of decision dated 27.03.2023 rendered in CWPOA No.1585 of 2019 (Rustam Singh Versus State of H.P. & another). CMP(M) No.1148 of 2023 and LPA No.226 of 2023 instituted by the State against the aforesaid judgment were dismissed on 04.11.2023.

¶12

2. Following order was passed in the matter on

¶13

10.09.2024:-

¶14

1 Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes

¶15

¶16

“The respondents have filed the compliance affidavit, however, it does not indicate as to in what manner the judgment dated 27.03.2023 has been implemented by them. In terms of the judgment, the respondents were directed to pay to the petitioner actual salary w.e.f. 01.07.1999 to 30.06.2000 against the post of Agriculture Extension Officer within a period of two months. Failure to comply with the judgment within two months was to result in payment of 6% interest on the amount payable to the petitioner from the date of filing of the writ petition.

¶17

Learned Additional Advocate General to have fresh instructions in respect of compliance of the judgment.

¶18

List on 12.09.2024.”

¶19

3. Pursuant to the above order, learned Deputy Advocate General has placed on record instructions dated nil from the Director of Agriculture, Himachal Pradesh alongwith an office communication dated 11.09.2024 from the Deputy Director of Agriculture, Palampur, District Kangra, addressed to the Director of Agriculture, Himachal Pradesh and on that basis submits that all admissible financial benefits to the petitioner in terms of the aforesaid decision towards payment of salary on actual basis w.e.f. 01.07.1999 to 30.06.2000, i.e. amounting to Rs.70,980/have been paid to him on 09.09.2024. Learned Deputy Advocate General on the basis of aforesaid instructions also submits that interest @ 6% per annum in compliance to the judgment dated 27.03.2023 will be released to the petitioner within a period of three weeks from today.

¶20

¶21

In view of the above-noted office instructions

¶22

and the submissions made by learned Deputy Advocate General, these contempt proceedings are closed. Notices issued to the respondents are discharged. The petitioner shall, however, be at liberty to seek appropriate remedy in accordance with law at an appropriate stage in case need so arises in future.

¶23

Jyotsna Rewal Dua September 12, 2024 Judge Mukesh

Rustam Singh v. C. Paulrasu and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rustam Singh v. C. Paulrasu 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

Randhir Singh Vs Rohan Chand Thakur

Kirpa Ram Vs Hrtc and Another

Om Parkash Vs Hrtc and Another

Pyare Chand Vs Tara Chand and Others

D C Model High School Vs the State of Hp and Others

National Highway Authority of India Vs Sansaru Devi and Others