====================================================== Smt. Sarwar Dawd W/o late Ahmad Jamal Pasa, Resident of Village Telhatta Bazar v. 1. The State Of Bihar through

Legal Reasoning

made by the University. There is no dispute that the said amount has already been received by the petitioner. In fact, no rejoinder to the said show cause has been filed by the petitioner. Mr. Tiwari, learned counsel for the B.R.A Bihar University states that a supplementary show cause on behalf of the opposite party no.8 has been filed in the present case after service of notice thereof on the counsel for the petitioner. The aforesaid fact has not been denied by the counsel for the petitioner. Said copy is, however, not on record. A copy of the said supplementary show cause has been handed in by learned counsel for the petitioner for perusal of the Court. From the averments made therein it appears that the claim of the petitioner for arrears of difference of salary for the period 01.01.1986 to

31.12. 1989, on account of grant of UGC scale as also the DDA amount for the period 01.04.1985 to 31.12.1985 with 9% compound interest including the interim relief for those period was examined by the University whereafter the same was audited by the State audit team and a sum of Rs. 40, 975/- was found payable to the deceased employee (now the petitioner). A sum of Rs. 17,619/- was paid earlier and as such a total amount of Rs. Patna High Court MJC No.904 of 2008 (9) dt.11-01-2013 Page 4 /5 23,356/- was only found payable to the employee. It is submitted that the said amount has been paid to the petitioner. Mr. Tiwari, learned counsel, further points out that along with supplementary show cause the entire calculation of the amount has been enclosed ( Annexure-B series to the said show cause). He fairly states that if the petitioner is not satisfied with those payments a liberty may be granted to her to file a claim in this regard which shall be considered in accordance with law. No rejoinder to the said supplementary show cause has, however, been filed on behalf of the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the payments made by the Bihar University does not satisfy the total entitlement of the petitioner for the period 12.10.1982 to 11.10.1992. This stand has been taken on the basis of certain calculations of entitlement prepared by the College duly signed by the Principal of the concerned college which is, however, not on record. Having heard the petitioner and the counsel for both the Universities and considering the direction(s) made by this Court on the writ petition filed by the petitioner, in my view, it cannot be held that the opposite parties have acted in deliberate and/or wilful disregard of the order of this Court. The opposite parties have taken steps for payment of the dues as per the entitlement of the deceased employee. The petitioner may have reason(s) to dispute the actual amount to which the deceased Patna High Court MJC No.904 of 2008 (9) dt.11-01-2013 Page 5 /5 employee would have been entitled to. This issue, in the face of the direction issued by this Court on the writ petition, cannot be gone into in a contempt proceeding . This Court is, thus, satisfied that the direction(s) made on the writ petition preferred by the petitioner have substantially been carried out by the opposite parties. If the payments made by the two Universities do not satisfy the petitioner, in my view, she may be granted liberty to approach the concerned opposite parties by filing a detailed claim supported by documents which, if filed, shall be considered and

Arguments

.... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Ms. Madhuri Lata For the Respondent/s : Mr. Shivendra Kishore Mr. Harendra Kumar Tiwary Mr. Ambar Nath Banerjee Mr. (Sc16) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KISHORE KUMAR MANDAL ORAL ORDER 9 11-01-2013 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Vivekanand Singh appearing for the Jai Prakash University and its officials and Mr. Tiwari representing the officials of the Baba Saheb Bhim Rao Ambedkar Bihar University. Present application seeks initiation of a contempt proceeding to punish the opposite parties for having wilfully and deliberately disregarded the order dated 27.03.2006 passed by this Court in CWJC No. 8753 of 2005 (Annexure-1). Operative part whereof reads thus:- “ Considering the fact that these Patna High Court MJC No.904 of 2008 (9) dt.11-01-2013 Page 2 /5 the period are the amount for which petitioner is entitled after her superannuation as well as after the revision of salary of the teachers and staff of the University under the U.G.C scale, all these amounts are payable to the petitioner. Accordingly, this writ application is being disposed of with a direction to the Baba Saheb Bhim Rao Ambedkar Bihar University, Muzaffarpur, to make payment of arrears of salary for the post of Lecturer from 12.10.1982 11.10.1992 the petitioner. All other payments are to be made by the Jai Prakash University. Jai Prakash University is directed to return all necessary documents for the to 11.10.1992, period from 12.10.1982 relating to the payment of salary of the petitioner to B.R.A. Bihar University, Muzaffarpur, within two weeks from the date of presentation/communication of a copy of this order. B.R.A. Bihar University will make payment to the petitioner within documents/records from the Jai Prakash University. So far arrears of salary for the post of Reader 12.10.1992 to 30.11.1998 is concerned, it should be paid by Prakash University. So far arrears of salary, arrears leave encashment, of pension, gratuity, G.P.F., G.I.C. are concerned, all amounts in the revised scale must be paid by the Jai Prakash University to the petitioner within the date of presentation/communication of a copy of this order.” weeks of four weeks the period receipt of the Jai Diverse show causes have been filed on behalf of both the Universities ( opposite parties). Mr. Vivekanand Singh, learned counsel for the opposite party nos. 2 to 5, relying on the show cause filed on their behalf, states that from diverse statements made in the said show Patna High Court MJC No.904 of 2008 (9) dt.11-01-2013 Page 3 /5 cause particularly in paragraph nos. 5 to 11 it would appear that the opposite parties have substantially complied with the order. From the averments made therein it appears that the petitioner has been paid diverse amount(s) under diverse head(s) on calculation

Decision

disposed of in accordance with law. The application, therefore, deserves to be dropped but with the liberty aforesaid. Dismissed. (Kishore Kumar Mandal, J) Shyam/-